History of Modern India: Volume 2 : 1974 to 1982 [2]

Citation preview

IDSTORY OF MODERN INDIA

( 1919-1982 ) (Volume .JI 1974 to 1982 )

HISTORY OF MODERN INDIA (1919-1982)

VOLUME II

(1974· TO 1982)

By V. D. MAHAJAN, M.A.

(Hons.), LL.B., Ph.D.

Author'of Ancient India, Muslim Rule in India, British Rule in India; History of India upto 1526, India Since 1526, Advanced History of India, History of the Nationalist Movement in India, Leaders of the Nationalist Movement, History of Modern Europe Since 1789, History of Great Britain, England Since 1485, England Since 1688, Constitutional History of India, International Relations Since 1900, International Law etc.

First Edition

1983

sfi

caAND

&

COMPANY LTD

RAM NAGAR, �EW DE;r..m.1100115

S. '"CIJA,ND Rega.

-&·

COMPANY, -LTD

O.ffece+BAM-NA�.AR,

-

NEW:. DELm-110055

Show Room: 4/,1�-B, 4saf A_Ii Roa . d, New Delhi-110001

Branches: Mai Hiran Gate:, ifa.landhm·-144001· Aminabad Park�� L"uckiiow-226oor Sultan Bazar, Hyder,abad-500001 Blackie House, 103/5, Walchand Hirachand Marg, Opp. G.P.O·, Bombay-400001 613-7, M. G. Road, Ernakulam, Cochin-682018

·285/tf, Bipin Behari Ganguli Street, Calciitt1Vi00012' Khazanchi Rqad, Patna-800004 3, Gandhi Sagar East, Nagpur-440002 KPCC Bldg., Race Course Road, Bangalore-560009 152, Anna Salai, Madras-600002

First Edition 1983

PublisheiJ by-Sr Ohand &: Oompany Ltd., Ram Nagar, New Delhi-110055 and printkd at Ralendra Rtwindra Printers (Pvf.) Ltd,../lam Nagar, -

W-etfJ 'tJ'ezli{.1tiJ055.

PREFACE It gives me great pleasure to put in the hands of the readers

"History of Modern India from

:first

volume covers

volume from

1919

to

the period from

1974 to 1982.

1982" in two volumes. The 1919 to 1973 and the second

A perusal of the two volumes will show that I have tried to

deal with the subject in_· detail to give a complete picture of the

happenings in India during the last more than

60 years.

I have taken

great pains to collect all the relevanil material from various sources. In the

second volume dealing with recent events, I have dis­

cussed at length the circumstances leading to the imposition of Emer­

gency on 25 June 1975. I have also given in detail the working of the Emergency in the country. I have given its achievements and also

the sufferings of the people during the Emergency. I have discussed in detail the elections of March 1977. The chapter on the Janata Government is a detailed one and deals with practically all aspects

of the work done by the Janata Government. While I have its achievements, I have also dealt with its failures.

given

I have devoted

a lot of space to the circumstances under which the Janata Government fell on 15 July 1979. I have given in detail the part played by Cha- . ran Singh, Raj Narain, Sanjay Gandhi and Mrs. Indira Gandhi to

bring about the fall of Janata Government. In the chapter on Charan

Singh, I have given in detail the circumstances under which he

became the Prime Minister and how he fell within so brief a period. I

have given details regarding the circumstances which led to the

resignation of Charan Singh on

20 August 1979.

full Chapter to the return of Mrs. Gandhi

after her defeat in March

1977.

I have devoted a

to power in January

1980

In the last Chapter, I have discussed

the work of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi from

1980 to 1982.

I have tried to make the book as comprehensive as possible

leaving out the unnecessary details. The book is meant both for students of modern Indian history and also the public in general. It

is hoped that the book will be welcomed by all those for whom it is

meant.

VIDYA DHAR MAHAJAN

CONTENTS Page•

-OH.APTER I

1974-THE YEAR OF UNREST AND AGITATIONS l..:_3

Railway Strike (1974) Nuclear Explosion (1974) Gujarai Agitation (1974) Bihar il.\Iovement of 1974 Congress Can;).p at Narora ·Refleutions on the Year 1974

"3....:.6

'(i,:_'7

7-15 -

lG

) "ii'

'

CH.APTER II

JANUARY TO JUNE 1975 Death of L.N. Mishra Jayaprakash Narayan addresses Yol;ltb: Rally Jayaprakash Narayan addresses Jan Sangh Meeting Jabalpur Election Tlie· Kashmir Accord (February 1975) Bye-elections Jayaprakash addresses Government employees J.P.'s appeal to army and police · Dismissal of Mohan Dharia (March 1975) J'.P. ·Marches to Parliament J.P. addresses rally Orisea and J.P. J.P.- in Calcutta University Calcutta happenings in Parliament Police Action at Arrah Supersession of Municipal Corporation of Delhi Happellings in Gujarat Fast-of Morarji Desai Elections in Gujarat (June 1975) .Allahabad Judgement {12 June 1975) Reactions to the Judgement Views of Opposition parties Rallies oh 12 and 13 June Opposition parties meet the President Statement of S.N. Mishra Resolution of Congress Parliamentary Party Rally of 20 June Oppositfon Resolution of 21 June Draft Programme .Appea;l :filed in Supreme Court Conditional Stay Order by Supreme Court '

r

18-19 19 19-20 . 20 20-23 23-24

24 24-21f

25-27 27'-28 28-29 29-30 . 30 3�31 31 31.,.:....32 .. 32 32-SS: "33-34 34;_35 351. 35---'.3 . 6·3µ3'/t f 3' 37-38' 31!

sg__.4().' .·· 40

40-'...4 . -J 41" 41-42-

( viii ) Pages

Public meeting on 25 June at Ramlila·Grounds ' In;tposition of Emergency on 2 0 June

42-43 43-46

CHAPTER III

PBIME MINISTER

INDIRA GANDW'S

ELECTION CASE

Election Petition in High Court 4,ll_?habad Judgement A.Ppe,a,l filed in Supreme Court Qrder, on Stay Application TJi.e Election Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 The Constitution (Thirtyninth Amendment) Act, 197.5 �unity Bill Arguments in Supreme Co\U't Judgement by Supreme Court

47-48 48-52 52-54 §!t-58 58--61 61-62 62 62-64 64-66

CHAPTER IV

THE EMERGENCY (1975-1977) ArJests at night S,t�tem!lnt of District l\fogistrate of Delhi Pr!ffie �inister's Broadcast on 26 June 1975 M�cellanoous Legislation during Emergency Ce!lsor�hip of the Press Broadca _ st of Prime Minister on l July 1975 Ju ;_ �hlf!c.ation for Emergency :ey�n.g� 26 Organisations Lett!'lr.;of K. Santhanam to P.M. L�pter of J.P. to P.M. :q�t.J;iir iof Bhm;.�en Sachar and others to P.M. Jdej;ter of Era �ezhiya11 ·�mfirgency" in Parliament White Paper on Emergency L�_tter.:to President The Pi;ess and the Emergency l:'ress Reserve Police and ihe Bor QQdition of ruling elit� c&sti;i$ who cot!l4 not "Qe

..

8

expected to implement the reforms.

History of Modern India The administration of Bihar

was perhaps the most inefficient in the country and there was corruption everywhere.

The Government was too inefficient to better

the lot of the people.

Bihar has been the home of smallpox.

In the middle of 1974,

there were 70% more cases of small pox in the world than in 19'l3

and 83% of those cases came from.India where two out of every

three cases were registered in Bihar.

The Government machinery

was so inefficient that in a few months 20,000 people died 9f small­

pox.

The political leadership was callous and indifferent.

On 18 March 1974, the Bihar State Legislative Assem,bly was

to meet. On that day, the Students' Action Committee, representing several Patna colleges and y01;ith groups, held a demonstration at the State Assembly, demanding a reply· to a

memorandum on

educational reform presented to the State Education Minister at

the end of February

1974.

!

The students protested against mal­

administration, corrupt on and rising prices.

'!'hey ,were backed by

the students' wings of the Jan Sangh, the· Socialist Party, the

Samyukta Socialist Party and Congress dissidents who had their

grievances against the niinistry in power. action.

The police took strong

Students who crossed the barricades set up by the police

were removed and thrashed.

They retaliated by throwing stones

and the demonstration was dispersed by

Latkis and tear gas.

On the same day, a mob carrying kerosene and rag!! set on

fire the building housing the two newspapers of Patna,

Searchlight

in English and Praaeep in Hindi, destroying machines, files, news­ print, reels and rotary. Although the police ·station was nearby,

the police arrived at the spot two and a half hours after the start­ ing of the fire. It is allege!! that the delay w�s deliberate as the

editor of Searchlight was critical of the alliance between the Congress and the Communist Party of India and the ;fire was a

result of the revenge by the Communist Party of India against the newspaper.

Organised violence lasted for four days and the Government offices were paralyzed. Legislative .Assembly.

Students qlocked all approaches to the

Pitched battles were fought between the

police and the crowds which had become violent. The offices of the Patna Municipal Corporation and other buildings were set on

fire.

The police and the army-were given shoot-at-sight orders only

when there was imminent danger of the Chief Minister's house being set on fire by the hooligans. When all this violence took place, Jayaprali:ash Narayan was

in the Ohristiwn Medic�! College at Vellore where he h�d

l}een

�

1974-Tke Year of Unrest ana Agitations admitted for surgery. of

violence.

Writing

9

He was very much perturbed by the -news in

the

•Everymans' of

Jayaprakash Narayan observed that in

30 March

any other

1974,

country

the

Government would have resigned after "such a monumental failure of administration." He advised the students not to get mi:x:ed up with the violent elements who were determined to tarnish the image of the movement. violence.

He wanted the students to follow a policy of non­

Jayaprakash Narayan was

condemned

by

Indira Gandhi and other leaders of the Congress.

Prime On

I

Minister

April

1974,

Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in a speech at Bhuvaneshwar asked, «How can such persons who continue to seek favours from the money­

ed people and keep in constant touch with them dare to speak of .

coITuption ?" On 6 April

1974,

Jayaprakash Narayan said, "Speaking for

to mis-government1 myself, I cannot remain a silent spectator corruption and the rest, whether in Patna, Delhi or elsewhere. It is not for this that I at least had fought for freedom .

I am not

interested in this or that ministry being replaced or the (Bihar) Assembly being dissolved.

These are

achiev.ement will make no difference.

partisan It will

aims

and

their

be like replacing

tweedledum with tweed]edee but I have decided to fight corruption

;;,

a d mis-government and black-marketing wofiteering and hoarding, � �o fight for the overhaul of the educat10nal system, and for a real people's deµi.ocracy."

8

On the request of the stud�nts, Jayaprakash Narayan led on April

1974 a

silent procession of peace-marchers in protest against

indiscriminate arrests and police excesses.

]i

T e processionists had

their lips sealed with pieces of saffron cloth and their hands clasped behind from backs. procession journey.

Jayaprakash Narayan himself silently led the

in a jeep and looked grim throughout the eight-kilometre The processionists caITied placards bearing slogans such

as «Our hearts are filled with sorrow but our tongues are tied", ccWe are too overwhelmed to speak", "Our silence symbol izes our firm determination" and «Whatever be the form of attack on us we

will not even lift our little finger."

The procession was organised by

Sarvodaya Manda,1, tlie Tarun Shanti Sena and the Gandhi Peace

Foundation.

Practically,

the entire population of Patna thronged

the streets and cheered the processionists while men and women from house-tops and balconies showered flowers and garlands on them. On the following day, a newspaper captioned its descrip tion Qf this impressive scene &i'l "Five mile� of silence". Simil&r &ilent

10

History of Moilern Inilia

processions were taken out at various district headquarters as an

On 9 April 1974, Jayaprakash Narayan

act of silent solidarity.

broke his silence to say at a mammoth public meeting in Gandhi

Maidan that

!J.e

had "taken a vow to change the present situation

as it has now gone beyond �y tolerance..

when a flare-up is a must." Police repression

A. stage has now come

continued culminating in police firing on

peaceful demonstrators at Gaya on 12 April 1974 killing 8 persons and injuring 15.

What shook .Tayaprakash Narayan particularly

was not so much the firing by the police because that had become common in those days, but the refusal to have an objective inquiry.

All that the Bihar Government did was to send a single officer of

its own who spent one day at Gaya and exonerated the police 'in an arbitrary manner.

The entire public

the firing was absolutely unjustified.

of Gaya was convinced that

The Gaya Bar Association

took out a silent procession in protest asking for tbe suspenl:lion of

the officers responsible for the firing. They urged the Government to release the lawyers, teachers and students who had been arrested

and demanded a judicial inquiry.

Jayaprakash Narayan himself went to Gaya on 16 April 1 974.

At the Railway station, he was welcomed by no less than 50,000

people.

Speaking at the Gandhi Maidan to a crowd estimated at

2 lakhs, .Tayaprakash Narayan rejected the idea of a judicial probe and expressed his lack of faith not only in Government officials but

even in retired judges who sometimes prolong the period of inquiry

in order to earn larger fees.

He announced that he would set up

a three-man Committee consisting of honest and fearless persons-an advocate, a teacher and a citizen-to go into the cause of the police

firing and its justifiability. Subsequently, he announced from Patna a 7-man commission of inquiry consisting of two former High Court Judges , a retired District Judge and four lawyers. ·

Jayaprakash Narayan decided to have a rally of his supporters

in Patna on 5 June 1974.

However, the Communist Party decided

to hold on 3 June 1974 an anti-J.P.

and pro-Government demQn­

stration in Patna. The Communist Party of India staged a demon�

stration in front of the State Assembly at Patna. A.bout 50,000 people

participated.

Shri S.A. Dauge, the Communist leader and others

especially arrived iivPatna to a�dress the rally.

They were given a

red-carpet welcome by the State administration as the CPI rally was intended to support the Government.

It was

reported

in

the

Hindustan Times that there were men in the C.:P.I. Morch� who were armed with bows and arrows,

11

1974::-Pke Year of Unrest anfl .Agitations

0Jayaprakash Narayan held his rally at Patna on 5 June 1974.

"It .was a gigantic mass demonstration.

Shots were fired on the

procession led by Jayaprakash Narayan and 21 persons were injured.

Jayaprakash

Narayan referred to

this,

as

well as to an earlier

incident, at a. public meeting that evening : Bihar distrusts its ewn police force.

«The Government of

We have a fine army which

has raised the country's prestige and respect.

Can there be a matter

of greater shame than that these brave soldiers should be used to

:fire upon their own people �

Is there no way to understand and

deal with a people's movement except through bullets and

and jail 1

latkis

Should not t·he demands of the movement be readily

acceptable 1 " The refe].'ence of Jayaprakash Narayan to th� "army" was to the troops of the Border Security Force and the Central Reserve Police.

The Times of India reported : "Nearly half-a-million people

today ·marched to Raj Bhavan under the leadership of Mr. Jaya-'

prakash Narayan to present to the Governor two million signatures

in support of the demand for the dissolution of the Bihar Vidhan

,Sabha."

By mid-June 1974, the Bihar movement had spread. Chhatra Sangharsh Samitis were set up in every village in the State and Jan

Sangharsh Samitis were set up to involve the public in the movement

which aroused tremendous enthusiasm. The atmosphere was charged

with excitement and hope. Satyagaraha became a daily feature of life. Jayaprakash Narayan called for closure of colleges and univer­ sities and for a no-tax ca.mpaign. Thousands of people were arrested under the Maintenance of Internal Security .Act.

,,,

Jayaprakash Narayan and his followers also set up what were known as «Janta Sarkars" or «People's Governments. " They were to work in cooperation with the

Government agencies wherever

possible and without their help, if necessary, in dealing with local problems and prejudices ranging over caste, custom, the fair distri­ bution of .commodities and the settlement of disputes outside the

local court or police station. «Janta Sarkarf?" were also to form

committees at village, block and district level to make people aware of their importance in the voting nrocess, set up candidates for final

selections from each polling booth area and act as watch-dog booths

at election time.

.Any future Government was to reckon with these "permanent organs of people's power " . Jayaprakash Narayan hoped

that Bihar . would become the laboratory of an experiment for whic4 the mood of the people seemed to be ripe.

HiBtory of Moile?·n India ·

12

Jayaprakash Narayan explained the need for « Janta Sarkars" to the All-India Youth Conference at Allahabad on 29 June in these words : "In countries where democr:i.cy has developed an infra­ structure there are many checks on those in power : the Press, the academic institutions, the. intellectuals. There is strong public opin­ ion. We have no such structure and it will take time to develop. I wish to give the people's. movement a revolutionary direction so that the people develop their own power to become guardians of democracy. .l\iy interest is not in the capture of power but in the con:ttQl of the power by the people." The three-day Bandh on 3, 4 and 5 October 19'74 called by Jayaprakash Narayan in BihaT in protest against the repressive policies of the State Government, was, except in Chhota Nagpur, a fantastic success and exceeded the wildest dreams of its sponsors. The people had shown that they were solidly behind him. Addressing a mammoth public meeting on 6 October 1974 at P.atna which was attended, according to the Times of India, by 5 laJrhs of people, Jayaprakash,

�arayan

declared that the Bandh had signalled the end of the

«Indira wave' ' in Bihar. Neither she nor the Chief Minister should have any doubt about the verdict of the people. He appealed to the

members of the State Assembly to read the writing on the wall and resign in good time. Answering questions why the Government had not arrested him, Jayaprakash Narayan stated that the Government knew that it would not be possible to handle the situation in Bihar

if he was arrested.

In early November 1974, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi told the Congress Parliamentary Party that the Bihar movement was aimed at her personally to drive her out of office. She called it reactionary Stnd accused it of support by the Anand Marg. •

On 4 November 1974, a huge procession was led by Jayaprakash Narayan at Patna. The Bihar Government made full preparations to make the rally a failure. There was a massive show of armed strength never witnessed before even during the British Raj. Thou­ sands of policemen were deployed in the city and around it. All a ccesses to Patna were sealed and kept under the strictest surveil­ lance. Trains, steamers and buses to the city were cancelled. Patna was virtually cut off from the rest of Bihar and India. The city was virtually besieged by Government forces fearing massive marches from all corners of Bihar. Patna was barricaded and defended against its own citizens by thousands of policemen and security forces brought in from outside the State which were ordered to thwart the peaceful demonstration of the people's will to remove an unpopular Govern.m.ent. AH India a.nxiously awaited the news from Patna.

1974-Pke Year of Unrest and Agitations According to the staff correspondent of the Statesman, reporting from Patna on 3 November 1974, barely 10 hours before the propo­ sed show-down, Chief Minister Abdul Ghafoor had declared that his Government was prepared "to crush the lawless rebels who are out to destroy the democratic institutions and ruin the State." The same correspondent reported the arrest of more than 4,000 persons during the preceding 72 hours and the cancellation of all train, bus and steamer services to Patna. He further reported that "hundreds of capital-bound taxis, buses and trucks were stopped by the security people at various check points. " Thousands of copies of a printed leaflet were issued by the District Magistrate of Patna and dropped from the air in Patna and its adjoining districts. The said leaflet contained a warning to the potential demonstrators that those who defied the prohibitory orders would be punished with rigorous impri­ sonment for up to three years. On the same day, a group of 362 students was whisked away to an unknown destination by the authorities. In spite of all the preparations on the part of the Government, Jayaprakash Narayan was able to take out a procession on 4 November 1974. Estimates of the size of the procession varied from 15,000 to 40,000. The demonstrators were peaceful but the attitude of the police was not. The demonstrations began at a out 10 A.M.

�

and continued upto 10 P.M. The photographer of the Statesman was able to take the photograph showing that the policemen armed with canes were attackip.g Jayaprakash Narayan himaelf and he fell down on the ground. The police injured a large number of demonstrators. They hit them with batons fitted with- brass-knobs · and broke their heads, arms and legs. They were reported to have kicked the peaceful demonstrators with jackboots. They were shelled with tear-gas. At one time, the jeep of Jayaprakash Narayan was completely enveloped by tear gas. The Commissioner of Police, Patna Division was asked why Jaya­ prakash Narayan was not arrested on 4 November 1974 and his reply was : «Mr. Narayan is not an ordinary person. He is a dignitary of international status. We cannot equate him with an ordinary member of the crowd." Regarding the happenings on 4 November 1974 at Patna, Jayaprakash Naryan declared a week later : "Whether, the blows were meant· for me or not is best known to the Prime Minister herself, for it was the Central Reserve Police which was wiedling the Lathis What is of great concern to all democrats is that if this is repeated, then the people will have :io chance to give •••

14

�

History of .Modern India

expression to anything that goes against Government policies and actions, however bad or evil such policies might be ... I am not surprised that while the common people are the target for action, truth is the first casualty in their (Government's) campaign to defame the movement . . . . The Prime Minister also goes on repeating that the movement in Bihar is in the hands of the RSS and the Anand Margis. The RSS has, of course, been active in the Bihar movement not directly but through its members in the Jan Sangh and the Vidyarthi Parishad-student wing of the Jan Sangh. But the Socialist Party, the SSP and the Old Congress and their youth wings, the RSP and the Marxist Coordination Committee are all fully involved and active in �he movement. The CPI-M had not joined the Coordination Committee of political parties, but has extended full support to the movement. So has the Forward Bloc. Non-existent groups are repeatedly mentioned but- the active involve.ment of all these parties, a majority of whom are radical, is ignored. The Prime Minister should at least know this elementary principle of politics that it is the function of opposition parties to try and dislodge the party in power." On 11 Nov�mber 1974, the Communist Party of Ip.dia staged its own demonstration in Patna. Armed with spears and bows and arrows, the demonstrators who included farm and factory workers and t;ribal people drawn from the rural areas, went to Patna and paraded the streets threatening to wage a bloody struggle against the movement of Jayaprakash Narayan. The demonstrators were accorded red-carpet treatment by the authorities. The following is a Press report dated 12 November 1974 : "For the last three days, CPI demonstrators have been coming to Patna. Most of these, according to reliable reports, travelled without tickets on trains. Tf.is gave the impression that the Bihar Government tried: to encourage the CPI people to come -to Patna. All trains and bus services, it will be recalled, had been suspended on 4 November with a view to preven­ ting Jayaprakash's people from coming to Patna." On 16 November 1974, the Indian National Congress had its own procession at Patna which was led by its new President, Shri Dev Kant Barooah. A large number of Congress MPs had come from Delhi and Yashpal Kapoor was supervising the procession. Shri L.N. Mishra, the Railway Minister, had requisitioned trains t.o bring parti­ dpants from other states and he was personally there to welcome 'them. The participants used jeeps, motorcycles and sometimes •elephants also. Police arrangements were perfect. On 18 November 1974, it was the turn of Jayaprakash Narayan :and his followers to have their say. It is generally believed that

ifll4-'l!ke

Year of rJnrest and Agitations

the meeting addressed by Jayaprakash Narayan on 18 November at the Gandhi Maidan was the largest ever held there. It was a bigger show than those of 11 November and 16 November 1974. :Before Jayaprakash Narayan began his speech, the well-known Hindi writer Phanishwar Nath Renu declared that he had given up the title of Padma Shri which had been conferred on him earlier as well as a stipend of Rs. 300/- per month. Jayaprakash Narayan addressed a vast sea of humanity before him. While referring to the way in which his earlier meetings had been barricaded by the Government, Jayaprakash Narayan said, "l ask the Congress leaders from Delhi : Do the people have the right of peacefui d,emonstration or not 1 People were coming to exercise their birth-right to tell the legislators, you are no longer our representative, leave your chairs. Legislators resign. Ministers, resign. Now I ask them, do the people have the right of such peaceful demonstration or not 1 I am reminded of some lines of a poem by Dinkarji : Clear the way, hear the rumbling of the Chariot of Time, leave the throne, for the people are com.ipg. We had a demonstration of their democracy when this fear of the people made them bring out two lakhs CRP and BSF men." Jayaprakash Narayan told his audience that the demand for the .Assembly was perfectly democratic even if it meant cuthing short their stipulated tenure under the Constitution. .An agitation to bring about the dissolution of the legislature was in order as the Supreme Court had upheld tlie right of peaceful agitation. On 3 December 1974, the Indian Express reported that the jails of Bihar were "bursting at the seams with student and political "\l orkers" on the eve of the winter session of Bihar .Assembly. Ten Opposition and Sarvodaya leaders had been externed from the State. Barricades set up by the police .extended into rural areas. Forty­ three �sembly seats were vacant, 37 of which were due to resigna­ tions in response to the mov.ement of Jayaprakash Narayan in Bihar. On 4 December 1974, the opening day of the Bihar .Assembly session, Soviet TV cameramen enter�d the Bihar .Assembly chamber contrary to the rule prohibiting cameras in the chamber. Ilyashenko, Chief of the Soviet Radio and Television in New Delhi, said that he -was there "with the permission of the Government of India." On :account of opposition by the Opposition members of the .Assembly, the Soviet TV withdrew. Shri I.K. Gujral, Minister for Information and Broadcasting, was asked whether he had granted the permission or not and his reply was that the Soviet request had been transmitted to the Bihar Assembly Secretariat to ilo what was considered to be proper.

History of Moilern lnilia Congress Camp at Narora On the initiative of the Congress President Devkant Barooah, a training camp of Congress leaders was held at Narora, a village in Uttar Pradesh about 70 miles from Delhi. Elaborate arrangements were made for this camp and Prime Minister Indira Gandhi attended it. The political programme adopted by the Narora training camp stated that similar training camps at state level and district level should be held within a fixed time, that Youth Congress camps and youth rallies for the defence of democracy should be held, that conferences of agricultural workers should be organised in all the districts and the Congress Seva Dal should be reorganised and strengthened. The economic programme adopted at the Narora

camp included a crash scheme for the distribution of non-alienable house-sites to Harija:ris and landless labourers in rural areas, the

creation .of a separate agency for providing credit to Scheduled Castes and Tribes and other sections of the rural poor, extension of the public distribution system for the supply of certain essential commodities, provision of &Qholarships for the poor students, organisa• tion of consumers' resistance, dehoarding drive against black. marketeers, a crash scheme for building houses for the low-income . groups, a programme of slum improvement and the org;i,nisation of the agricultural labourers and the rural poor. The situation created by the JP movement in Bihar was also considered with a view to decide the strategy of meeting it. A secret document consisting of 13 pages and containing an analysis of the JP movement, was circajated at the camp. It said, "Behind the facade of a partyless democracy lurk dark forces of Indian

fascism, well-organised and well-poised to destroy the democratic institutions and impose a reign of terror. The Jan Sangh, the RSS and the Anand Marg are the driving forces behind the assault on the

citadel of democracy. When it falls, they will move quickly to occupy positions of vantage. The result {Jan be P,redicted : A naked dictatorship of the propertied classes will come into existence. It will appeal to the most retrogressive tendencies in our social an4 political life. Communaliam, regional chauvinism and fanaticism of all kinds and a narrow, self-denying cultural revivalism will thrive. It is not accidental that these forces should strive to challenge democracy at a time of grave economic difficulties. .Again, it is not accidental that in posing this challenge, they should seek to confuse the public mind by employing a variety of ruses such as the call to end corruption and raising the issue of electoral reforms. And, :finally, it is not mere coincidence that the parties which have

1974-Tke Year of Un1·est anil .Agitations

17

joined the campaign against democracy are simultaneously opposing our whole concept of planning and the Congress policy of coopera­ tion with the Soviet Union and other socialist countries". Oh 1 January 1975, the Hindustan Times commented editorially, "It was the tragedy of 1974 that development was subordinated to politics, while politics in turn has come increasingly to be influenced by black money and the economic underworld which. has established an unfortunate nexus with the country's administra­ tive and political echelons. The Government has not improved its image by its reluctance to move firmly, swiftly and openly against every form of corruption. It is essentially this sense of anger and anguish that epitomises the Bihar movement. Mr. Jayaprakash Narayan has become a symbol whose true relevance extends far · beyond Bihar." . Dr. J.D. Sethi wrote thus about India in 1974: "In the preceding chapters, we tried to spotlight the main �risis of India today. The crisis is multiple : it is at once political, economic, social, and of values although it is primarily political which quickly but deeply penetrates into other spheres. Not only have the masses lost confidence in the power elite but the elite has lost con­ fidence in itself, so much so ·that all the three important political institutional categories, namely the government, the regime, and the system are in an advanced stage of deterioration and repudiation. This crisis takes the most serious and immediate form of telling on the economic life of the people or more manifest form of corruption, black money, normlessness, and above all widespread violence. In other words, the crisis is all-pervasive and its challenge to the .nation and the people cannot be minimized." (India in 01·isis, pp. 178-79).

.

·aRAPTER II

JANUARY TO JUNE 1975 Death of L.N. Mishra The year

1975

began with the tragic death of Shri

L.N. Mishra, 3 January

Minister for Railways in the Government of India on

1975.

He was injured on 2 January

1975

at

5.50 P.M.

by a bomb

explosion· at a railway platform. ceremony at Samastipur in Bihar.

·When the bomb exploded, Shri profusely.

L.N.

Mishra lay on the dais bleeding

Although there was a security

Bandobast,

he was not

taken to the local hospital but was given :first-aid in a nearby

railway saloon.

Half an hour later, the medical officer of the Northern Railway announced that there was nothing to worry about.

Shri Mishra lay in the saloon for two hours and a suggestion

that he be taken to the hospital at Darbhanga which was an hour

When doctors from. the hospital arrived, they

away, was overruled.

were prevented by his personal staff from attending on the Minister.

The train · carrying the wounded Minister did not leave Samastipur until

8.30 P.M.

He was taken.to Danapur, Bihar , where another

45

minutes were lost while the train shunted from the wrong . plantform to the correct one. after

When he reached the operating table,

6

-

u"

ho rs

the explosion, he was a case of "grave emergency" as his

injuries had advanced.

operation."

Shri

R.V.P.

«It

was a herculean effort to start the

Sinha, the Surgeon who operated on him

at Danapur, later on pointed out that the inordinate delay i n getting him to the hospital was suicidal. Shri Mishra died at 9.30 A.M. on

a January 1975 at Danapur.

Crit.fos point out that the failure to provide security for the

Minister was "deliberat�" in spite of the instructions of the Bihar Government in

1974 to

all relevant departments that special security

arrangements must accompany-the visit's of the Minister to the State of Bihar.

After crushing the railway wurkers' strike in May

1974,

Mishra feared assassination ancl hacl told some of his colleagues that he suspected a political conspiracy against his life.

18

It is said that a

'

January to June 1975

19

priyate detective had informed· the Delhi police specific

threat

naming

Samastipur

and

in writing of a

Darbhanga

as probable

danger spots. Taking these things into consideration, the security arrangementz at the railway ceremony at Samastipur were extra­ o:vdinarily lax.

The death of Mishra by violence. raised speculation

about his role in the Pondicherry scandal around import licences of the value of Rs.

29

lakhs.

Jyotirmoy Basu's (CPI-M) statement jn

Parliament that Mishra's office and home had been searched immedi­ ately after bis death to remove incriminating documents was not answered by the Home Minister.

The extreme slowness of the CBI

investigation created further suspicion of the involvement of the Government.

It was pointed out

that the prompt dismantling of

the dais at Samastipur where the explosion had taken place, had destroyed the . primary evidence and that must ha.ve been delibe­ a-ate. A condolence meeting was held a.t Delhi to mourn the death of the late L.N, Mishra.

A portion of Mrs Indira Gandh!'s speech at

thtl condolence meeting was broadcast on 7 January 1975 by the All India .Radio and in that speech Prime. Minister Indira Gandhi stated that Mishra's death was a "rehearsal" for which she herself was the "real target". assured

At the condolence

the Prime Minister

of

his

meeting,

everybody

support to her.

Shri H.N.

Bahuguna., Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, said, «Fifty-eight crores of people stood solidly behind the Prime Minister."

Jayaprakash addresses youth rally On, 19 January 1975 at a youth rally at Patna, Jayaprakash Narayan appealed to the supporters of the Dihar movement to enligh­ ten the people about the dangers ahead and mobilise them to defeat

3il1Y move on the part of the Government to thrust dictatorship on the com1try. He pointed out that the speech of the Prime Minister at the condolence meeting of Lalit Narain Mishra sh'owed that she was reali�ing that "the people were losing confidence in her". He defended the multi-party membership of the Bihar movement and pointed out that

it had

no

labels.

Congress had faced partipipation in it.

The

Lathis

members of the Jan Sangh and Old

and bullets and were in prison for their

He would �ot ask any party to leave it.

Jayaprakash addresses Jan Sangh Meeting Ori 5 March

1975,

Jayaprakash

Narayan addressed' the 20th

plenary session of the Jan Sangh in New Delhi and declared that he. wanted to communicate his conclusion after a year's work with the Jan Sangh and the RSS, that he had found them neither reactionary nor fascist.

Fascism was emerging but it was coming from

li:nother

,20

History of Modern India

quarter. A similar hint was given by Shti P. Sundarayya, General Secretary of CPI-M, at Hyderabad on 12 February 1975. He pointed out that his party had not joined hands with the Jan Sangh or the Bharatiya Lo&: Dai. The real danger came from Prime :Minister Indira Gandhi. It would not surprise him if she, aided by the Communist Party of India, repeated the Bangladesh development and called off the 1976 elections.

Jabalpur Election In the third week of January 1975, the Opposition won a . .spectacular victory in the important bye-election to the Lok Sabha from Jabalpur in l\iadhya Pradesh. This seat - became vacant on -account of the death of Seth Govind Das who had held it since his membership of the Central Assembly during British rule. The new· Congress candidate was his grandson Shri Ravi Mohan who was backed by Shri P. C. Sethi, the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh. The Chief Minister put the State transport (including helicopters} .and resources to support the congress candidate. Ravi Mohan was defeated in all the 8 segments of Lok Sabha constituency. The Times of India described it as "a veritable tornado''. Sharad0; Yadav who defeated R avi Mohan was virtually unknown. He was merely an engineering student who was nominated by the local Jan Sang�arsh· Samiti and Chhatra Yuva Sangharsh Samities.

The Kashmir Accord (February 1975)

Sheikh Abdullah had been the Chief Minister of the State of Jammu and Kashmir till 1953 when he was removed from that posi­ tion. He was prosecuted and detained. Although between 1953 and February 1975, there were Congress Ministries in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, it was felt that some sort of understanding be arrived at between the Government of India and Sheikh Abdullah. For that purpose, Mirza Afzal Beg was, named by Sheikh Abdullah and Shri G. Partharsarathy by J>rime Minister Indira Gandhi. They had long discussions and ultimately arrived at certa1n agreed conclusions. On 11 February 1975, Sheikh Abdullah wrote to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi accepting those conclusions and Prime Minister Indira Gandhi wrote back on 12 February 1975 to .Sheikh Abdullah -endor�ing the agreed conclusions arrived at between Mirza AfzafBeg and G. Parthasarathy. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi made an announcement in the Parliament about this accord on 24 February 1 975 and on 25 February 1975 Sheikh Abdullah was sworn in as Chief Minister of the State of Jammu and Kashmir after the resignation of the Congress ministry of the State headed by Syed :Mir Qas!m.

.January to June 1975

21

The agreed conclusions reached between Mirza Afzal Beg and

G. Parthasarathy provided that the State of Jammu and Kashmir

which is a constituent unit of the State of India, shall in its

relations with the Union of India, continue to be governed by Article 370 of the Constitution of India. The residuary powers of

legislation shall remain with the State. However, Parliament will

continue to have power to make laws relating to the prevention of activities directed towards disclaiming, questioning or disrupting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India or bringing about cession of a part of the territory of India or secession of a part

of the territory of India from the Union or causing insult to the Indian National

Flag, the

Indian

National

Anthem and the

Constitution of India. Where any provision of the Constitution of India had been applied to the State of Jammu and Kashmir with adaptations and modifications, such be altered or repealed by

an Order of the President under Article 370 of the Constitution of India, each individual proposal · in this behalf being considered on

its merits but provisions of the Constitution of India- already applied to the

State of

Jammu and

Kashmir without

a(f.aptation or

modification, are unalterable. With a view to assuring freedom to the State of Ja:mmu and Kashmir to have its own legislation on

matters like welfare measures, cultural matters, social security, per•.

sonal law and procedural laws in a maiiner suited to the special condi.;

tions in the State, it was agreed that the State Government can

review the laws made by Parliament or extended to the State afte�

1953 on any matter relatable to the Concurrent List and may decide

which of them, in its opinion, needs amendment or repeal. Appro.;

priate steps may be taken under Article 254 of the Constitution 0£

India. The grant of President's assent to such legislation would ba

sympathetically considered. The same approach would be adopted in regard to the laws to be made by Parliament of India under the

proviso to Article 254 (2). The State Government shall be consulted regarding the application of any such law to the State and the

view of the State Government shall receive the fullest consideration. As an arrangement reciprocal to ;what has been provided under

Article 368, a suitable modification of that Article as applied to the

State of Jammu and Kashmir should be made by Presidential

Order to the effect that no law made by the legislature of the Stata

of Jammu and Kashmir seeking to make any change in or in the effect of any provision of the Constitution .of the State of Jammu. and Kashmir relating to any of the under-mentioned matters shall

take effect unless the Bill, having been reserved for consideration

-0£ the President, receives his assent. Those matters are the appoint•

History of Modern India

22

ment, powers, fuirctions, duties, privileges and immunities of the Governor "and the following matters relating to elections, namely,

the superintendence, Election

direction and control of

Commission of

India,

eligibility for

elections by . the

inclusion

in the

electoral rolls without discrimination, adult suffrage and composition of the Legislative

138, 139, 140 and 50

Council

being

matters specified

�1

Sections

of the C9nstitution of the State of Jammu and

Kashmir. -No agreement was possible on the question of nomen­

clature of the Governor and the Chief Minister and the matter was

left to be settled later on. In her speech in Parliament on

24

February

1975, Prime

Minister Indira Gandhi stated tha� the agreed conclusions have been

formulated within

the framework of the Constitution of

India. The constitutional relationship between the State of Jammu and Kashmir and Union of India will continue as it has been and the extension to be governed by the procedure prescribed in Article

370

of the Constitution of India. There will be no weakening of the

ties w.hich exist between the Union of India and its constituent

units of which the State of Jammu and Kashmir is one. The existing jurisdiction of the q�ntre to deal with activities directed towards

questioning or disrupting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of of India or bringing about cession or secession of any part of the territory of India from the Union, shall also continue. It has also

been agreed that any amendment of the Constitution of the State on certain specified matters of importance will not become effective

unless the assent of the President is obtained. The agreed conclusion reassured the State that in case the State Government comes up

·with any proposal to change any Central law made after 1953 on matters in the Concurrent List such as social welfare measures, cultural matters, social security, procedural laws and the like, the

grant of assent to the bill will be sympathetically considered. A

proposal was made by Mirza Afzal Beg that the jurisdiction of the

Supreme Court in relatfon to the State should be curtailed. This wa)'l not accepted as· it is considered important that the Supreme Court should continue to have its original and appellate· jurisdiction in the

matter of writs, appeals and other matters. However, it was agreed by collateral letters that the provision in Article 132 (2) of the Constitution of India enabling the Supreme Court to grant special leave on the refusal of a certificate by the High Court, need not apply to the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Action will be taken on this point only when the State Government comes up with a

proposal in that behalf. A change in the nomenclature of Governor and Chief Minister can be made only by amendment of the Stat�

Janua1y to June 1975

23

Constitution by the State legislature. So far as the Chief Minister is concerned, there should be no objection to the nation

Wazir-i-Azam

�doption of the desig­

in the State if the legislature of the State of

Jammu and Kashmir amends its COI}Stitution accordingly. Until that is done, the present designation would continue.

The Prime Minister further stated i n her speech that Sheikh

Abdullah was very anxious that to start with, the constitutional

relationship between the State and the Centre should be as it was

in 1953 when he was in power. It was explained to him that the

clock could not be put back in that manner. Mirza .Afzal Beg

pressed for the transfer of provisions relating to Fundamental Rights

to the State Constitution, the removal of the supervision and control of-the Election Commission of India over elections to the State legislature and modification of .Article 356 to require the State Government's concurrence before imposing President's rule in the State. It was not possible to agree to any of those proposals and Sheikh .Abdullah accepted the agreed conclusions. Before concluding, the Prime Minister stated that the settle­ ment that has been reached is an entirely domestic matter. It has·

been the endeavour of the Govern�ent to find satisfactory solutions for political problems in a spirit of conciliation. The manner in

which differences with Sheikh .Abdullah have been resolved shows the vitality of the functioning of our democracy. "It is my sincere

hope that the agreement will open a new era of understanding and

coopei:ation with those in the State of Jammu and Kashmir who had

not associated themselves with the main stream of national life dur­ ing the last two decades. It will also amply demonstrate the iden­ tity of interests and ideals of the people of the State with those in

the rest of India and mark a milestone in the onward march of our

nation". (Asian Recorder, da�ed March 26-April 1 , 1975, Pp. 1250212504).

Bye-eiections The Oppositionfs

Janata candidate

won at the Govindpura

bye-election in Madhya Pradesh. February 1975 brought further defeats of the .Congress in two (Meham and Rori) out of the t - hree

bye-elections to the Haryana State Assembly. One of the successful

.Tanata candidates was a young lawyer who was new to politics and

Chief Minister �ansi Lal had personaUy campaigned ext-ensively against him with several cabinet colleagues. The Barpeta (Assam}

bye-election to the Lok Sabha took place on 20 February 1975. The seat had been vacated when Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed became the

President of India. President Fakhruddin paid a

visit to Assam

History of Moilern India

24

which coincided with the Congress election campaign. Shri B. , Goswami, the Janata candidate had a dramatic lead of 41, 000 votes in a constituency of 100,000 but he was declared defeated by 25, 000

more vqtes than the constituency had in favour of the Congress candi­ date. The messenger of Goswami who wanted to go to Delhi to lodge a complaint with the Election Commission was detained at Gauhati and was not allowed to proceed.

Jayaprakash addresses Government employees Addressing a meeting of the Government employees

in New

Delhi at the Boat Club, Jayaprakash Narayan reminded them that they were permanent public servants,

unlike the President, the

Prime Minister, MPs and MLAs who were temporary and they should not obey illegal, immoral, or partisan orders. To quote him, ccYour loyalty is to the country, to the people and to the Constitution, not to the Government, the Prime Minister or the Home Minister. Use your rights and do your duty without any fear."

Interview with J.P. As Jayaprakash Narayan repeated his appeal to the army and the police on many occasions, he was interviewed in Delhi in May

1975. The following is tlie report of the question and the answer

given by Jayaprakash Narayan : «Question : At Bhubaneshwar your appeal to the army and police has been described by the Home

Minister as treasonable, because it may cause disaffection in the armed forces and police. Can you explain the context in which your remarks were made ? And what is the role you envisage the armed forces and police to play ?"

"Answer :

What I said at Bhubaneshwar about the

army and the police, I have said earlier also at some· places. Let me take up the

army first. On March 3 I had said at the mass rally at

the Boat Club, New Delhi, in the context of the possibility of some sort of authoritarianism scuttling our democracy, that the loyalty of the ar­ my was to the country, its flag and its Constitution. The Indian people have given themselves a democratic constitution of the parliamentary type. The President of India in his capaciy as Supreme Commander of the armed forces is pledged to protect and uphold the Constitu­

tion of the country from authoritarian threats. If any party, govern­ ment or party leader intends to use the army as a means to further their party and power interests, it is the clear duty, to my mind, of the army not to be so used. If the rulers do venture to use the army to suppress a peaceful revolution, then the army should not allow itself to be so used. I have also decried sometimes the use of armed personnel to deal with civil disturbances, for which the civil armed forces, like the armed police and the para-military forces, should be

·

25

January to June 1975

enough. If all this amounts to committing treason, I shall not mind

being prosecuted for this offence.

«As for the police, the circumstances in which I have made

references to them are these : Sometimes in the course of the (Bihar)

Movement, the police commits excesses, no doubt under orders of superJor officers

.•

For instance, on November 4 last, when I, with a

iarge number of students and citizens in Patna deliberately broke prohibitory orders, the Central Reserve Police personnel pre�,ent were asked to lathi-charge. The demonstration was entirely peace­

ful. Not even a pebble was thrown by any demonstrator and not a

single policeman or magistrate was injured, and yet there was a lathi-charge. It would have ·been perfectly legal if we had all been

.arrested. But when there was no violence of any sort, in fact even

when I was hit and fell to the ground, youngmen kept shouting the "Police hamare bliai hain, unse nahin ladai hai" (The police

slogan

.are our brothers ; we have no quarrel with them), a lathi-charge was wholly unjustified.

ccThere have been hundreds of cases where policemen have been -ordered by their superiors to commit illegal acts. Take the Calcutta

incident of April 2. While thousands of hooligans milled around my: car, hit it with sticks, reducing its sunshade to smithereens, and

some of them got up on the hood and others on the roof, and jumped and danced on it, badly damaging the car, the police looked on disinterestedly. I saw Samar Guha,

MP , being struck on the face

with a stick just two or three yards from my car. Yet the police did nothing. Is it wrong in suoh cases to tell the police what their duty

is � I consider it my duty to explain to the police that they must not obey orders that are illegal or go against their conscience. " •.•...

Dismissal of Mohan Dharia Speaking at the Harold Laski Institute in Ahmedabad on l

March 1975,

Mohan Dharia,

a

Minister in the Cabinet of Prime

Minister Indira Gandhi, emphasi;t;ed the necessity of talks between Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and the Opposition leaders. He .also did not approve of the brutal treatment of youth demonstra.: tions. He also declared� "The CPI design to replace the tricolour with the red flag would be frustrated."

In a letter of the same

date, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi informed Mohan Dharia, "It is not proper for you to continue :\TI the Council of Ministers since

your views are not in conformity with the thinking of the Congress Party."

Mohan Dharia , was

astonished at his abrupt dismissal.

He tendered his resignation to the President of India and said that he would explain it in the Lok Sabha. To quote him, "Had the Prime Minister shown the courtesy of indicat:lng to me her intention,

26

History of Modern India;.

either directly or indirectly, I would have immediately and willingly tendered my resignation." In a speech in Parliament on 5 March 1975, Mohan Dharia denied the charge of the Prime Minister that he did not agree with the policies of the Congress. He pointed out that where his views on implementation or behaviour had differed, he had repeatedly used party forums, or conveyed iihem personally to the Prime Minister to make thP,m known. To quote him further� «On October 7, 1974, I personally conveyed m:y feeling that the continuance of persons with dubious reputations in the ministry would erode the credibility of the Government . . To adopt a callous attitude towards rising doubts in the public minds is easy, but to ignore them is very dangerous.. . The period between 1969 and 1911 was one of making promises and giving assurances . . 1 971 should have been marked by the determination of the Congress and the administration to enter upon an era of performance . . .I have Been of the view that the cooperation of all such parties and people · should be sought who are willing to contribute in the implementa­ tion of the policies in the interests of the common man. " Mohan Dharia further maintained that he had sent a letter and note to the Prime Minister on 19 November 1974 asking for a time-bound programme of action. In his letter of 26 February 1975, he had further elaborated his views. :Before writing the letter on 26February, he had tried from 11 February 1975 onwards, to get an appointment with the Prime Minister but had failed to get one. Re did not know how else he cowd have posted the Prime Minister with his thinking. The statement of Mohan Dharia was heard in Parliament with rapt attention and was warmly welcomed by his constituency. Instructions were sent to the Congressmen of Pune city ancl district to boycott a reception and public rally in his honour but the same were said to have been ignored. His dismissal added to his reputation and stature. The curt dismissal of Mohan Dharia provoked the Times of India to write the following editorial on 6 March 1975 : "But he . {Mr. Dharia) is qui�e right when he says that the ruling party and the Government can recover their lost credibility only by attempting t� , not evading, many of the issues raised by the movement led by Mr. Narayan. The most pertinent among these are Lhe reform of the electoral system to reduce the power of big money over it and the clearing up of public life . . .The least the ruling party can do is to come out with specific prop-osa1s on these issues, consult the Opposition parties, work out an agreement with them and, in case no accord can be reached, act on its own to establish bona fides. .

January to June 197 5

27

Mr. Dharia's warning that •democracy or any other ' system where . corruption is protected and honesty is penalised cannot endure for long' may look like an indictment of the very Government of which. he was a :n:!ember until th6 oilher day. -But, however harsh it may sound, it rings true."

J.P. Marches to Parliament On 6 March 19J5, Jayaprakash Narayan and Opposition leaders led a mammoth citizens' procession to Parliament and presented a charter of demands to the Speaker of the Lok Sabha. The procession was so lcmg that according to one account, when its vanguard reached Parliament House, its tail end was· almost at the Red Fort, a distance of about 10 kilometres. Its numerical strength was variously put at one hundred thousand to several hundred thousand or one million or even 1.5 million, none carrying a party fl.ag·. Some of the placards read : «Roti lcapada de na salce jo, wok Sarlca1· nikammi liai". (.A Government which cannot provide bread and clothes is worthless) and uSinliasan lcliali lcaro, Janta Aayee liai" ("Vacate the throne, people have come"). "Dancing with gay abandon and shouting slogans against the establishment, symbol clanking and drum-heating processionists marched in an orderly manner to the cheers of the onlookers. " In the thickly populated, areas rose petals and garlands were showered on Jayaprakash Narayan and the onloolrers by the roadside shouted : "Jayaprakash Narayan Zinda�ad" ("Long Live Jayaprakash Narayan"). The procession was timed to start at 1 0 .30 .A.M. One report says: icJ_;ooking tired after the three-hour march from Red Fort, but;. still in high spirits, Mr. Jayaprakash Narayan arrived at Parliament House a little before 2 P.M." According to the Times of India� Jayaprakash Narayan reached Parliament House at 2 .40 P.lVI. He was trav-elling seated in an o}>en jeep, standing up, from time to time, to acknowledge the tremendous cheers that were showered on him and that too in his very characteristfo pose with his right hand going up in the assuring gesture of its palm. .As Jayaprakash. Narayan came to the steps lea:ding to the Speaker's chamber, he was received by the officials with folaed hands. .According io lihe Indian Express, Jayaprakash Narayan is reported as having posed for photographs and newsreel camera men at the entrance. A chair was brqught to carry him up the steps ·but he declined to go that way a,nd walked up the steps. Mr. Jyotirmoy Basu and his CPM colleagues received him in front of the Speaker's chaniher. The cha\ter ·which embodied the demands mentioned in suitable language began with, "We, the people of India, have gathered here to express s�lidarity with the struggle of the Bihar people which has

28

History of Modem India

-0ome to symbolise the people's aspirations all over the country. When basic principles of public life and good Government are allowed to be trampled, it is the people's duty to protest. We march today to seek justice and preserve democracy."

j.P. addresses rally

In his address to the mammoth rally afterwards, Jayaprakash Narayan said that the sixth day of March was a historic day for iihe indians. It was on that day in the year of grace 1919 that the people of India had risen in revolt against a piece of repressive legislation which the British sought to force on them-the Rowlatt Act. Once again it was the occasion fo fight against another piece -0f repressive legislation (both enabling the Government to act tyrannically after decla1:ing a state of emergencyi , the emergency regulation. Jayaprakash Narayan called upon the people to join the proposed nationwide "Revoke the Emergency Demonstra: iiion" i n April in large numbers. He informed them that 18 March 1975 being the first anniversary of Bihar agitation, the week from 19 March to 26 March, will be devoted to launching mass agitation, in each and every Assembly constituency of Bihar, to press for the resignation of the MLAs. Jayaprakash Narayan further stated iihat it was becoming evident that the Prime Minister would use the emergency d!1clared in December 1971 to call off the 1976 elections and declare a Bangladesh-type dictatorship. He categori­ .-0ally denied inciting the people or iihe aripy to revolt and charged the Prime Minister with wanting the movement to turn violent so that she could have an excuse to crush it under a dictatorship. "You should not give her this opportunity." On 6 March 1975, Delhi wore an armed look. A Marxist M.P. described it in these words in the Lok Sabha : "The entire police force of Haryana seems to have tumbled into the capital, and blank­ faced policemen wielding anything from Lathis and batons to rifles stood In their hundreds at every point between the Boat Club and Parliament House. It was a human wall of policemen and on� could not move an inch without being challenged. Police barricades had been erected outside the Prime Minister's house far from the procession route. That morning the State-owned Delhi Transport Corporation cut its bus services from about 1200 to 336-explaining iihe stoppage as being caused by the need for repairs-to prevent citizens from joining the march. Haryana Roadways suspended all its bus- services to Delhi. Private buses were halted and delay�d at iihree points along the Gurgaon-Delhi route for checks 'to prevent -overloading'. Trucks were denied permission to carry passengers

January

to June 1975

29'

to Delhi. .Alongwith contingents of the State's police force sent to the capital, these measures brought Bansi Lal's militant authority and loyalty to the Prime Minister: into flamboyant display''. The newspapers of 7 March 1975 carried such headings as "JP leads mttssive march to Parliament", "Warning to Cenrre", «JP gives charter to Dhillon, House-business stalled", "EmI corruption; says charter", "JP leads great march'', "Parliament presented charter", and «Prepare for long fight to oust Congress. " .After presenting the charter to both Houses, JP described the march as "a turning point in the nation's history.

Ahmedabad At .Ahmedabad in Gujarat, Morarji Desai led on 6 March 1975 a procession to Raj 13hawan and handed over to the Governor a petition for elections to the State Assembly which were due following its dissolution in March 1974. It was given a rousing ovation all along the way.

Orissa and J.P. On 8 March 1975, the Statesman had editorially assessed

substantial support for Jayaprakash Narayan in Orissa because the State's Congress had never been reconciled to the arbitrary manner lli which Mrs. Satpathy (Chief Minister) was foisted on it. She had made "as many enemies within the Congress legislature party as outside." "The Orissa Government has done little . to mitigate distress from drought and flood; th(:l wheat procurement effort has almost collapsed; while ambitious promises on radical land reform have yet to be implemente l ." Mrs. Satpathy had set up an espionage system of young recruits to help the official agencies with information regarding the extent of the activit,ies of the supporters of Jayaprakash Narayan. She refused the Students' Union of Utkal University in the State capital permission to hold a conference on 31 March 1975 and invite Jayaprakash Narayan to address it. The relations between the Students' Union and the Government of Orissa had remained strained since late 1974 when the University had been placed under a Government administrator. The Students' Unioll had decided not to allow any State Minister to enter the campus of the University and Mrs. Satpathy was determined to break the same, On 24 March l975, flanked by armed guards and accompanied by the State Governor, Akbar .Ali Khan, she entered the University "smashing t.he human resistance put up by the Students' Union with' the help of outsiders displaying sticks, iron:­ rods and knives." The representatives of the Students' Union

Hist01·y of Modern India

ao

numbering more than 1 00 who were standing in the way of her entry into the campus, were overpowered by a contingent of the Youth Congress and armed "outsiders" . The Students' Union anp.ounced that it would hold its conference on 31 March 1975 as per schedule and it would be ·attended by 400 students' representa­ i ives from the colleges in the State and addressed by Jayaprakash Narayan.

J.P. in Calcutta University What was done by the Government of Bengal was worse than wliat was done in Orissa. On 2 April 1975, Congress and CPI youth organisations led by Subrata l\fokerji, the Information Minister of Bengal, stopped the party of .Tayaprakash Narayan when it arrived at the Calcutta University. The demonstrators climbed on his car and smashed the windscreen. Those who came out of the University building to receive Jayaprakash Narayan were surrounded, beaten and had their clothes torn. The meeting had to be abandoned. However, the orgy continued as Jayaprakash Narayan addressed teachers' convention while the hall was stoned and glass panes were broken. When Jayaprakash Narayan came out of the hall, he had to face a barrage of stones and missiles and was trapped with his companions for half an hour in his car before it was allowed t o move. Before leaving for Patna, Jayaprakash Narayan observed, "! could have been killed. I am sure this kind of thing could not have' happe:q.ed without the clearance of the Chief Minister and ,also of Mrs. Gandhi's Government. . . I do not think any single organisa­ tion is strong enough to face this menace because the Bengal Government is behind this menace ! appeal to all parties in the opposition, and all students and youth organisations in Bengal to bury their differences and join hands, and before anything els� destroys the rising menace of fascism.' ' ...

_Calcutta happening in Parliament

Events in Calcutta on 2 April 1975 evoked strong respon�e in Parliament. Mr. Krishna Kant of the Congress criticised his party in the Rajya Sabha for not expressing regret at the obstruction created by the West Bengal Congressmen who were led by their Chief Minister. Mr. Sa.mar Guha (SP) who was present at the Calcutta scene, testified to the obstruction and pointed out that the actual occurrence was much more serious than the mere prevention of address. He further stated that "he was proud he could save the most precious life in the country", meaning thereby t.hat Jayaprakash Narayan was, in that melec, in danger of his life. He pleaded in vain for the acceptance of his motion "Seeking unanimous

.January to June 1975 ,

31

condemnation of the assault.'' Shri S .N. Mishra asserted that the .attack on the car of Jayaprakash Narayan was pre·planned by the State Government and was led by the Chief Minister Shri Siddhartha Bhankar Ray and had the approval of. the Prime Mipister. Mr. Indrajit Gupta (CPI) moved an amendment to the motion of Shri Mishra which was d signed to put the blame on "the spate of_ violence unleashed by Jayaprakash Narayan's followers in Bihar. " Ultimately, the original motion of Mr. Mishra was voted upon and " rejected by a voice vote.

Police action at Arrah On 27 April 1975. Jayaprakash Narayan called attention to an

incident in the town of Arrah in Bihar in the previous week when

6 of his student workers had to be hospitalized and 12 othei;s had

received injuries. "It seems that the Government being unf.!,ble tc;> put down the Bihar movement by the forces at its command, is hiring Goondas and ex-criminals to do the job. It should be a matter of joy for everyone in the State, whether he agrees with the Bihar movement or not, that all through the time that the s:tudents were being beaten �p, they kept on raising slogans like struck down clause (4) of Article 329-A as unconstitutional on the ground that it was beyond the amending power of Parliament as it affected the basic features of the C_onsti­ tution. However, they gave different reasons for their separate judgements. Khanna J. struck down clause (4) on the ground that it violates the principle of free and fair election which is an essential ,postulate of democracy and which in its turn is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution. Democracy can function only upon the faith that elections are free and fair. Free and fair election requires that the candidate should not resort to unfair means or malpractices. Dis­ putes are bound to arise regarding the validity of elections. For resolving those disputes, there must be a forum. The vice of clause (4) of Article 329-A is that it abolishes the forum without providing for another forum for deciding election disputes of the appellant. The view of Mathew J. was that our Constitution [.Article 3�9 (b)] visualises that election disputes must be decided by a judicial process, namely, by ascertaining facts and applying the pre-existing law. Clause (4) validates the election by a legislative process. The amending body, though possessed of judicial power, had no competence to exercise it unless it passed a constitutional law enabling it to do so. If the amending body really exercised judicial power, that power was exercised-- in violation of the principles of natural justice of audi alteram pm·tem. There was nothing in the face of the amendment to show that the amending body ascertained the facts of the case or applied any norrqs for determining the validity of the election. The amendment damages or destroys an essential feature of democracy as established by the Constitution, namely, decision of election dispute by court in the exercise of judicial power by ascertaining facts and applying the existing law. He criticised it as a legislation arJ, hominem directed against t:\.le course of the hearing of the appeal on merits as the appeal was to be djsposed of in accordance with that clause and not by applying the

P;·ime 1lliniste1· Indira GandM's Election Case

•

65

law to the facts as ascertained by tM1 c�tcrt. This · w�s a direct inter­ ference with,the decision of the��1appea1s by the Sup�eme Court on theii merits by � legislative judgement. 'Iil {vas difficult to understand when the amending body expreM1ly excluded the operation of all Jaws relating to election peti£iori and matters connected there)Vith by adjudging the validity of the appellant. ·

The vie'v of 1\'Ir . Justice Ch'4ndrachud · (as he then was) was that clauses (4) and (5) of the Constitution (Thirtyninth Amendment) Act, 1975 were an outright negaBibn• of the right of' equality con­ ferred by Article 14 which more than'�ny other is'a basic postulate of the Indian Constitution. The provisions are arbitrary and are calcu­ lated to damage or destroy the rule· ffii law. Generality and equality are two characterfotics of jus.,tice afdID.inistered according- to law. Clause (4) makes the existing laws retrospectively inapplica,ble with• out providing a law. It creates a legal vacuum. It puts the election of the Prime Minister and the Speaker beyond the .reach of any Jaw, past or present. It is the common man's sense of justice which sus­ tains democracies and there is a fear that the Constitution (Thirty­ ninth Amendment)' Act, 1975 may outrage that sense of justice. Different rules may apply to different conditions and classes of men and even a single individual may form a class by himself. However, in the .absence of a difference reasonably related to the object of the law, justice must be administered in an even-handed manner to all. He rejected the contention of the Attorney-General that the amending body is an amalgam of all powers, legislative, executive and judicial. According tQ the Hon'ble judge, "Whatever pleases the Emperor has the force of law" is not an article of democratic faith. He further declared that in the name of the Constitution, Parliament was not free to turn its attention from the important task of legis� lation to deciding court cases «for which it lacks the expertise and the apparatus." He further said, «if it gathers facts, it gathers facts of policy. If it records findings, it does so without pleading and without framing any issues. And worst of all, if it decides a court case, it decides without hearing facts and in defiance of the fundamental principle� of natural justice.' ' In deciding this case, the Supreme Court, proceeded on the majority judgement in Kesa"Vanand Bharti's case (A.I.R. 1973 Supreme Court 1461) that Parliament cannot alter the basic structure and framework of the Constitution while enacting a constitutional amendment. Chief Justice A.N. Ray and Mr. Justice Beg delivered dissent­ ing judgements. Chief Justice Ray hel4. thii.t clal.l.S.e (4} i� ai

lll'tlI-5

66

History of Moaem India

"declaratory judgement" which has been passed by the legislature The constituent power can exercise judicial powers. .All powers, whether legislative, executive or judicial, flow from the constituent power. Mr. Justice :Beg held that clause (4) does not bar the jurisdiction of t.he Supreme Court to hear and decide the appeal. in exercise of judicial power and "not a law".

However, all the :five judges upheld the validity of the amendments made in the Election Laws in 1974 and 1975. They held that in view of the fact that the Amendments were to apply retrospectively, Mrs. Indira Gandhi had committed no corrupt practice. Tµe appeal of 1\frs. Indira Gandhi was accepted and that of Raj Narain was rejected. lShrimati Indira Nehru Gandhi V. Raj :Narain, A.I.R. 1975 S.C. 2299=(1976) 2 S.C.R. 347 =(1975 (Supp) Supreme Courp Cases 1).

CHAPTER IV

THE EMERGENCY (1975-1977)

Internal emergency was promulgated near about midnight between 25 and 26 June 1975. During that very night, ais many as 83 persons were rounded up in Delhi alone, followed by 250 in the second round on 26-27 June 1975. J'ayapra.E:ash Narayan was at the Gandhi Peace Foundation when the police arrived at the dead of night of 25-26 June to arrest him. He was taken to the Government Guest House at Sona in Haryana. Morarji Desai was also arrested during the same night and taken to the same Government Guest House at Sona.. Among the others arrested were Asoka Mehta, Chandra Shekhar, R;aj Narain, Piloo Mody and K. R. Malkani, Editor of the English - weekly Motkerlanit Shri Atal Behari Va.jpayee and L. IC Adva� were a1Tested at Bangalore. However, Subramaniam Swamy, a great economist and a Jan Sangh Member of Parliament, were forewarned by somebody on the telephone that the police was coming to arrest them and they should take care of them­ selves. The result was that they escaped before the arrival of the police and went underground and ultimately managed to leave the country. Nanaji Deshmukh and George Fernandes also went underground. The electricity · of the newspapers on the Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi was disconnected and therefore the newspapers in that area could ,not be printed at night between 25-26 June 1975. Similar action was taken at other places to stop the printing of the newspapers, sometimes successfully and sometimes without success. 1 The total number of persons detained all over the country under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act from 25 June 1975 to 18 March 1977 reaclied 34,630. Out of these, 6,244 detainees were held under the normal MISA provisions and 28,386 were detained under the emergency provisions of Section 16-A of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act. At the time of elections in March 1977, there were still 17,000. political detaine�� �n �ails all o'\er ��y..tb.e , Presidential Order referred .to in sub-paragraph (e) .of paragraj>h• (E) of the statutory order, but the, democratic - character of olir society has not been suspended. Therefore irrE)spective "of whether• fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 19 have been suspended, . free press and right of dissent which. ;are the essence ·of a democratic· society, cannot be suspended except to preven_t the t outbreak of violence and disturbance of public order WhereaErthe Government owes duty to the nation to curb the violent and marauding1 ai.ctiv.ities of its opponents, the ·Opposit�on musti be vigilant to see that in the name of curbing such activit.ies, the ruHng body does. not 'destroy the foundations of democracy and assum� a dictatorial or authori·

• .•

Eis'tor.y .of Moilern Iriilia

104

tarian_ form." Commenting on the Chief Censor's guidelines, the judge!!!.ent stated, "There cannot be a more Draconian assault on pe9pJ� �n a democracy than oi:i.e whicb. is disclosed by the guidelines . issued; )>y the Chief Qe:q1;1or-, Whether we are passing through an e ergepcy OJ: livi:l;tg ip, ,normal t.imes, whether the uncommon situa­ tiQ.l! in t'!;ie $Jqunj;cy requires plaqing of restraints on the freedom of pegpJe, t4�L gW,i;l�linef! iss�ed by the Chief Censor and quoted above cap. ;never b� lJ.ppeld. Public criticism which is life-line of democracy is soµght to pe c'qt by these guidelines and they pierce into its heart. To permi� fi\Wh, guidelines ,to operate even for a moment more will be destructive of our cherished democratic social order. wt are,

�

,

.

,

therefo!�• o� th,� , opinion t)lat such of the guidelines as have no re{erence wh�tsoever or .relation with the statutory purposes specified in, �ule 4:8 • OJ: Section 3 are illegal and inoperative . . .The. Chief Ce.nsor has been more loyal to the king than the king himself and has outwitte ,the people in their attempt to maintain even the basic form of democracy in this country." In the case of Minoo Masani v. Binod Rao, Bombay State . Censor which came up before the Bombay High Court in November 1975, Mn. Justice D.P. Madon and Mr. justice M.S. Kania analysed the contents of the impugned articles and commented : «The objec­ tions urged are unrelated to any of the purposes or objects of the censorship order, most of the consequences contemplated are fanciful and far-fetche d and the view taken is such as no person acting rationally can even possibly take. Logic rebels and reason revolts at, inferences so devoid of any foundation in reality or basis in

d

commonsense.' '

The Sadhana

_ The «Sadhana" of Poona was another journal which frequently annoyed the Censor. It got round the various punitive orders by ,changing 'the printing press, by changing its name and similar other subterfuges: The «Opinion�' of Bombay which was owned, edited and! published single-handed by Shri A.D. Gorwala, once a member of the Indian Civil Service, defied the Censor and was frequently punished J till there waa no printing press which was willing to print it. . The editor brought it out first as a cyclostyled weekly and when even this was not permitted, in the form of an irregularly issued cyclostyled letter addressed to each of the subscribers. He continued to do so till1 the withdrawal .of the emergency.

The Mainstream

•

The Mainstream of Delhi was 'punished because it wrote with critical frankness about the Gauhati session of the Indian Nationa.l Congress, It closed down on Christmas Day 1976.

The Emergency (19�5-77)

_

105

Samachar If the press was to be controlled permanently, it waS?necessary

that the news agencies should also be controlled. There were four of. them. The Press Trust of India and the United News of India were in English and the two Hindi news agencies were Hindustan Samacbar and Samachar Bharati. Each news agency had its own offices and correspondents spread all over the country. To be in effective control of these, the obvious first step was to merge them, but the agencies were not willing to lose their identity.' Shri V.C. Shukla consulted the Prime Minister and placed a proposal before the Cabinet for nationalising the news agencies. On 13 December 1975, the Prime Minister allowed herself to be persuaded by other ministers to drop the proposal. .As the next best step, Shri V.C. Shukla and Shri Mohammad Yunus put pressure on the four agencies and brought about their merger. In the third week of January 1976, the Boards of both the Press Trust of India and the United News of India passed the resolution of voluntary merger. The resolution had beei:i drafted at Shastri Bhavan and sent to them for their adoption. On the midnight of 3 1 January 1976, the Press Trust of India and the United News of India disappeared and the Samachar was born on 1 February 1976. It is pointed out that there was no difficulty with regard to the merger of Samachar Bharati and Hindustan Samachar -as both of them were running at heavy losses and there was inefficiency on account of the lack of funds. Their employees were too willing to merge themselves in order to have mQre security of service and .better salaries regularly. Mohammad Yunus tells us that he was determined to see that the Samachar was second to none. It was decided to have repre- ' sentatives in all the districts of India. Nobody had thought of doing anything to help the regional papers by providing them the latest news fit for printing. It was decided to open 50 offices in the leading world capitals : 15 in .Asia, 10 in Europe and 10 in .America. It was felt that such a boost alone woli.ld enable Samachar to compete with its powerful counter-parts in the world. The idea was to beat them on merit and in areas that were not covered by them. As a first step, the pay-scales were rationalised and the terms of service were fixed. Samachar also began to exchange news with 30 non-aligned countries on a self-paying basis (Persons, Passions and Politics, p. 229) . After the merger of the four age:µcies into Samachar, Shri V.C. Sh.ukla and Mohammad Yunils tried to bring the Express group of '

106

History of Modern India

papers to its knees. The Samachar demanded from it the immediate payment of. the entire lot of bills which were due to be paid to the four · uniting agencies. When the bills were not paid on demand, the Samaphar discontinued its service to t.he Express group. How.:. ever, they failed to achieve their objective as the Express group had their own "Express News Service."

Justification ·for Censorship While justifyiD:g the censorship of the press, Prime Minister Indira.. Gandhi declared, «In India democracy had given too much liberty to the new�papers which were misusing it and weakening the nation's confidence. If newspapers w�re allowed to incjte people, there would have been a terrible situation. Press censorship had to be imposed to prevent incitement of people to defy laws." Again, "you know the voice ,of the people is not always right. You have to educate them f�� th):lir voice to be right. Sometimes they are like children." The Chief Censor expressed himself in these words : "The purpose of the censorship instructions is to ensure that the press does not in any way contribute to scare or demoralise the country or act against public interest-the Central Government determining what is in public interest." Another objective of censorship was to use it to denigrade the political opponents of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi without giving them an opportunity to reply. It is pointed out that the White Paper entitled "Why Emergency" placed on the table of each House of Parliame;nt on 21 July 1975 contained many illcorrect quotations, but no section of the press could refuse to publish it nor dare to challenge the statements it contained nor any publishers would agree to publish any pamphlet refuting them. Likewise, when many allegations were made against George Fernandes in the press, no newspaper could challenge their veracity. Foreign Correspondents in India It was found difficult to deal with foreign correspondents in India. They were required to sign a pledge to abide by certain guidelines or risk expulsion. V.C. Shukla told them : "This is not a threat or a warning, just a statement of fact in plain language." ·On 30 June 1975, Lewis M. Simons of The Washington Post was expelled from the country. A month later, Loren Jenkins of News­ week, Peter Hazelhurst of the Times (London) and Peter Gill of The Daily Telegraph were asked to leave. The BBC announced that they wer� withdrawing their correspondent Mark Tully, from New Delhi because the severity of the censorship rules made accurate

Plte Emergency

(1975-77)

107

reporting impossible. V.C. Shukla gave the warning that the correspondents of foreign journals in India would be held responsible for any objectionable matter appearing in their press even if they were anonymous. Derek Davies, editor of The Far Eastern Economic Review, sent a cable to Shri A.N. Haksar, Chief of the Foreign Press Section in the Ministry of External Affairs. The

cable read : «We are reluctantly and under duress instructing our \ correspondent Lawrence Lifschultz to sign the pre-censorship statement solely on the ground that while in India, he must obey the . laws of the land, and that if he does not sign he would not be allowed to remain and work in India. However, the Review itself will continue to stick to its principles of independent journalism pointing out to the Indian authorities that, for example, the All I:µdia Radio correspondent operates in Hong Kong under no duress or restrictions whatsoever. We wish also to draw your attention to the fact that the Review has many sources of information on Indian affairs both inside an� outside the country and must point out to the Indian authorities it would be most unjust to hold Lifschultz responsible for any material appearing in the Review written by another person."

A correspondent of the Guardian was summoned to the Ministry of External affairs and advised to leave the country and was politely warned that that was the only way he could avoid "inconveniences". The staff of the New Delhi Bureaux of the Associated Press and the Los Angeles Times were allowed to work after they signed a revised

undertaking.

Some of the Indian representatives and correspondents of

English and American papers were punished with loss of accredita­ tion. One of them, Shri K.R. Sundara Rajan was detained under the MISA.

Yunus on Press Censorship About the press censorship imposed during the emergency, Shri Mohammad Yunus points out that it may have had some justification to start with, but it soon became counter�productive.

The '�eaders of magazines and newspapers began to have doubts even about the news reported correctly. With the passage of time, press censorship became irrelevant and hig�ly objectionable. The Prime Minister agreed to withdraw the press censorship and wanted Shri Mohammad Yunus to discuss the matter with her at length. The big journalists had no principles and therefore neither support nor their hostility was worth anything.

Even if they opposed the

Government whole hog, their condemnation seldom made any

108

History of Modern India

difference. An inter-ministerial meeting was fixed in the office of the Prime Minister in Parliament House in early May 1976 and was attended by Shri V.C. Shukla and hls officials, the Press Adviser to Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary, the Offiuial Spokesman and Mohammad Yunus. It was agreed that the press as a whole should not be penalised for the extremist fulminations of a few. V.C. Shukla was asked to lift the censorship but · nothing happened for a whole month. Mohammad Yunus reminded the Prime Minister about it towards the end of J"une 1976 anc;l submitted a long note on the working of censorship imposed last year. To quote him, "Its continuance is now affecting the credibility of even good and authentic news appearing in the Indian or foreign press. It has put the foreign journalists on the �arpath with us. Most of them hail from five Western countries and have been against us all along. They will continue to be so and we must learn to live with them. However, we have now developed a powerful weapon in the form of the News Agencies Pool of the Non-aligned Countries. We can expose their falsehoods and distortions and the Western media dare not indulge in their old antics with impunity: The withdrawal of censorship will certainly change the atmosphere. The local news­ papermen will feel that a premium' will be put on their reliability and accuracy, while their foreign counter-parts will realise that we are no longer bothered about what they say." Mohammad Yunus tells us that the Prime Minister was in complete agreement wit4 his approach and expressed her unhappiness over the delay in rectifying the wrong. She called another meeting in her office which was .attended by the same group. V.C. Shukla promised to frame certain guidelines and pointed out that as he was about to leave for Canada, he would withdraw censorship after his return. However, ·what was actually done by Shukla was that he lifted the censorship from the foreign newspapers and not the Indian newspapers. Mohammad Yunus writes, "It seemed not only absurd but patently, a wrong policy to maintain the confrontation with our own men and let the foreigners have a field day. What we needed immediately at the time was to diffuse the tension. Apart f;rom that, I pointed out to the Prime Minister on reaching Delhi, a piecemeal decision like that exposes us to total ridicul� . " The reply of the Prime Minister was, "Why is he doing all this 1 ·Surely the heavens won't fall if Mr. A or Mr. B indulges · in unfair criticism of the Government. Let me talk to Shukla." In spite of this, the press censorship continued in India till it was declared in January 1�77 tha,t general elections will be held in March 1977 (Persons1

The Emergency (1975-��)

i09

Passions and Politics, pp. ·234-5). The Congress had to pay heavily for the censorship of the press as it failed to know the real feelings of the people and had to depend upon its own agents who may not

be reliable. Judges

During the Emergency·, as many as 16 judges of the Hi�h Courts were transferred from one High Conrt to another. Mr.

Justice J.R. Vimadalal of Bombay High Court along with Mr. Justice P.S. Shah had struck down the Maharashtra Conditioi:{g of Detention Order. In their judgement, they -held that a detenu �as ·

not a convict and the power to detain was not a power to punish. Mr. Justice Vimadalal was transferred from Bombay to Hyderabad

although he had only 11 months' service (including three months' ' leave) left. .' Mr. Justice J.B. Mehta and Mr. Justice S.H. Sheth of Gujarat High Court struck down the censorship order in the Bhoomiputra

case. Their Lordships observed, "The Chief" Censor's guidelines in our opinion are thoroughly useless and worthless because the nation

which rises like an impregnable citadel above every individual or

groups of indviduals cannot be apronstringed to the Chief Censor; nqr can its political education and sovereignty be moulded into the cast of the Chief Censor."

.Again, "Public criticism which is the

lifeline of democracy is sought 'to'be cut by these guide-lines To perpiit such guidelines to operate even fo:c, a moment more w;ill be •• • . .

destructive to our cherished democratic social order0 00The Chief Censor has been more ioyal to the .King than the King himself and

has outwitted the people in their attempt to maintain even the basic form of democracy in this coootry.'' Mr. Justice Sheth was trans­ ferred' from Gujarat to Hyderabad. He challenged his order of

transfer and his contention was upheld by the High Court and the ' Supreme ·court (.A.I.R. 1977 Su,preme Court 2328). Mr. Justice P.!'f. Mukhi of the Bombay High Court was ordered to go from Bombay to Calcutta. His fault was that he made the Custodian of Enemy Property privately bear the expenses of a case that had arisen only because of the negligence of the Custodian. Mr. Justice Mukhi was a heart patient and he requested that his case

be reconsidered. He received a curt reply that adequate medical facilities were also available at Calcutta . .Although his transfer order was eventually l'.eversed, 'he died before returning'to the Bombay Bench.

Mr. Kuldip Nayar was arrested and put under detention. · His wife Mrs· Bharati Nayar moved a Habeas Corpus petition, The

H6

History of Modern Intiia

case was heard by Mr. Justice S. Rangarajan and Mr. Justice R.N. Aggarwal. After the hearing of the arguments, the case was reserved for judgement. The counsel for the Government told the judges thah the Government had decided to release Kuldip Nayar and hence the judgement. need not be pronounced. However, the judges pronounced the judgement in the open cob.rt as a large number of similar cases were pending in the court. This was too much for the prestige of the Government. The result was that Mr. Justice S. Rangarajan wa:s transferred from Delhi to Gauhati . As regards Mr. Justice R.N. Aggarwal, he was not a. permanent judge of the High Court of Delhi although he had worked as an Additional Judge for four years in the High Court and nothing adverse had come to the notice of anybody during that time. His case had been recommended for confirmation as a. permanent judge by the Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi a.nd Chief Justice of India. The Minister of Law and Justice also had recommended his confirmation. In spite of that, he was reverted as the District and Sessions Judge of Delhi as a token of punishment for his behaviour in the case of Kuldip Nayar. Mr. Justice Rajendra. Sachar was · transferred from Sikkim to Rajasthan. He is the son of Shri Bhimsen Sachar who was arrested and detafoed on account of his having addressed an open letter to the Prime Minister. Mr. Justice U.R. Lalit was appointed Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court for two years wit� effect from 17 January 1974. As his term was to expire in January 1976, the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court recommended that Mr. Justict} Lalit be appointed Additional Judge for . two more years. The Governor and Chief Minister of Maharashtra endorsed the proposal. The Chief Justice of India ako agreed to the proposal to give him extension for two years. In spite of that, Mr. Justice Lalit did not get any extension and he ceased to function as an Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court with effect from 17 January 1976. In spite of all that, there were judges who gave their decisions unmindful of the consequences. It is pointed out that the petitions filed by Mrs. Padma Desai, Mrs. Satya Sharma, Mrs. Kamla Lekhi and Mrs. Bharati Nayar would never have succeeded if the judges concerned were not determined to uph.old the rule of law. Mrs. Padma ' Desai wanted to . have access to Shri Morarji Desai hut the MISA Detenus Conditions of Detenti9n Rules were not a.vailable for reference. They had been published in the Dellii Gazette but a.II copies had mysteriously disappeared. Mr. Justice S. Rangarajan and Mr. Justice R.N. Aggarwal heard her petition and insisted that

Pke Emergency (i9'15-7Jl/)

iii

secret executive orders could not supersede the law which had to be publicly known and struck down inhibiting clause regarding inter­ views and correspondence. Mr. Asoka Mehta's sister and Maharani Mahendra Kaur of Patiala also successfully moved the courts. Mrs. Satya Sharma challenged the detention of her husband, Shri S.D. Sharma who was a signatory to Mr. Bhimsen Sachar's letter of 23 July 1975 to the Prime Minister and was rewarded with the ruling that under Article 359 (lA) executive action had to be justified by a valid law even during an emergency.

In the case of Kuldip Nayar, Mr. V.M. Tarkunde who argued the case on behalf of Mrs. Bharati Nayar's habeas corpus petition for three days, said, ccI was always of the opinion that whether grounds of detention were given or not, it is possible to establish that detention was unlawful". It was held by the High Gourt that an order of detention under MISA would be beyond challenge only if it is passed under the law. In very many cases, it was argued on belJ.alf of the Government tliat the suspension of fundamental rights also abrogated the right to judicial review. However, many High Courts maintained that under Section 2 of MISA, the executive was obliged to prove that the arrested person somehow endangered public security. While doing so, they relied upon the concept of "natural justice" elaborated by Mr. Justice Hegde in an earlier case and on Mr. Justice Hidayatul­ lah's ruling of 1966 on charges against Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia. The view of the judiciary was that even during an emergen cy, a man could be deprived of his liberty only on the basis of reasonable evidence. Arrests could not lie «solely within the subjective satisfa­ tion of the executive". The Supreme Court under Article 32 and the High Courts under Article 226 continued to enjoy the right to examine the validity of such detentions. The rule of law did not wither away simply because Article 21 had been suspended. An Ordinance of 16 November 1975 tried to foreclose all arguments on the propriety of detention. In spite of that, the courts conti­ nued to follow Lord Atkin'.'s memorable dissent in the Liversidge case, «It has always been one of the pillars of freedom, one of the principles of liberty for which on recent authority we are now fighting that the judges are no respecters of persons and stand bet­ ween the subject and any attempted encroachments on his liberty by executive, alert to see that any coercive action is justified in law." In the Habeas Corpus petition by Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi and Virendra Singh Chaudhary before a Bench of the Allahabad High Court, Chief Justice K.B. Asthana in his judgement pronounced

iH

1

(I

J '"

t

"'

• "'

History of Moaern Inaia

the order of detention as mala flae and that the detaining authority had violated the basio principles of the Act and overstepped its limits. It w;as further held that the Act under which the orders had been passed was itself ultra vires and the detention order was based on materials which were irrelevant to the Act. While commenting upon the contention of the Advocate-General that the right of personal liberty had been eclipsed, the Chief Justice stated:- "That means that in this glooming atmosphere, the Executive has full power and authority to act arbitrarily, i.e., in an atmosphere which is glooming, the spirit of Hitler would be haunting, that his ghost may play hide and seek with the lives of the citizens or their personal liberty and self-respect and terrorize them . Such an idea miglit have never been even in the mind of the President when on June 26, 1975, while enforcing Proclamation of Emergency, he passed orders that the courts be deprived of the power of enforcement of the rights under Articles 15, 21 and 22." Acting Chief Justice V.D. Tulzapurkar oJ Bombay High Court struck down a police order banning a private meeting of lawyers to discuss civil liberties and the rule of law under the Constitution. To quote him, "No Government which suppresses even peaceful and constructive criticism of emergency at a public debate, no Govern­ ment which preserves the freedom only for the cringing and the craven and no Government which permits its Police Chief to perpe�rate on its citizell$ the humiliation and indignity of being required to obtain prior .permission for their normal, innocent and innocuous activities can have ,any moral right to proclaim to the world that democracy is alive in this country." In the case of Phandudas Krishna Gawde, Mr. Justice J.R. Vimaldalal and Justice P.S. Shah cf Bombay High Court struck down clauses relating to diet, interviews and medical treatment in the Maharashtra Conditions of Detention Order. Their view was that "a detenu is not a convict and the power of detention is not a power to punish" and that "restrictions placed upon a detenu must, consistently with the effectiveness to detention, be minimal,"

Additional District Magistiate, Jabulpur V. Shivkant Shukla However, the hands of the judges were tied after the pronoun­ cement of the judgement by the Supreme Court presided over by Chief Justice A.N. Ray in Additional District Mayistrate, Jabulpur V. Shivkant Shukla and others reported in A.I.R. 1976 S .C. 1207. In the above case, respondents filed applications in different High Courts for the issue of a writ of Habeas Corpus . They challenged

Phe Emergency (i97o-'77)

113

in some cases the validity of the Thirty-Eighth and Thirty-Ninth Constitutional .Amendment .Acts and the Proclamation of Emergency by the President under .Article 352 of the Constitution !!lade on 25 June 1975 . They challenged the legality and validity of the orders of detention in all the cases. The state raised a preliminary objection that the Presidentfal Order dated 27 June 1975 made under .Article 359 of the Constitution suspending the right of the detenus to enforce any of the rights conferred by Articles 14, 21 and 22 of the Constitution and the continuance of Emergency during which by virtue of .Article 358 all rights conferred by Article 19 stand suspended, are a bar at the threshold for the respondents to invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court under .Article 226 of the Constitution and to a_sk for writs of Habeas Corpus. The High Courts held that notwithstanding the continuance of emergency and the Presidential Order suspending the enforcement of fundamental rights conferred by .Articles 14,21 and 22i the High Courts can examine whether an order of detention is in accordance with the pJ."ovisions of the Maintenance of Internal Security .Act which constitute the conditions precedent to the exercise of powers there­ under excepting those provisions of the .Act which are merely procedural or whether the order was made mala fide or was made on the basis of relevant material by which the detaining authority would have been satisfied that the order was necessary. The High Courts also held that in spite of the suspension of enforcement of fundamental rights conferred by .Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitu­ tion, the right of a person to freedom from arrest or detention except in accordance-- with law can be enforced only where such arrests and detentions are not in accordance with those provisions of the statute which form the conditions precedent to the exercise of power under that statute as distinguished from merely procedural provisions, or are mala fide or a11e not based on relevant materials by which the detaining authority could have been satisfied that the order of detention was necessary . .Appeals were taken to the Supreme Court by the various Statea against the orders of the H'.igh Courts. The appeals were accepted by the Supreme Court by a majority. It was held that in view of the Presidential Order dated 27 June 1975, no person has any locus standi to move any writ petition under Article 226 before a High Court for Habeas Corpus or any other writ or order or direction to challenge the legality of an order of detention on the grmmd that the order is not under or in compliance with the .Act or is illegal or is m.ri;-8 .

114

i1istory of .Mioil'ern thdia'

vitiated by mala :£I.des; factual or legal, or is based on extraneous considerations.

Mr. Justice H.R. Khanna alone wrote a dissenting judgement· in which he observed : "Law of preventive detention, of detention without ' trial, is an anathema to all those who love personal liber£y. Such a law makes deep inroads into basic human freedoms which we all cherish and which occupy prime position among the higher values of life. It is, therefore, not surprising that those who have an abiding faith in the rule of law and sanctity of personal :\jberty do not easily reconcile themselves with a law under which persons can be detained for long periods without trial.

The proper forum for

bringing to book those JLlleged to be guilty of the infraction of law and commission of crime, according to them, is the court of law where the correctness of the allegations can be gone into in t1ie

light of the evidence adduced at the trial. The vesting of power of detention without trial in the executive has the effect of making the

same authority· both the prosecutor as well as the judge and is bound to result in arbitrariness," Mr. Justice H.R. Khanna had to pay a heavy price for giving a dissenting judgement. The above-mention­ ed judgement of the Supreme Court has been described by critics as "judicial suicide" and "a mockery of the very concept of justice."

Supersession of Mr. Justice H.R. Khanna ,

In January 1977, Mr. Justice H.R. Khanna, the seniorn;iost

Judge of the Supreme Court, resigned because he was superseded by

Mr. Justice M.H. Beg who was appointed as Chief Justice of India although he was junior to Mr. Justice H.R . Khanna. The official reason given for his supersession was that he would have been Chief Justice for five months only. The view of Shri N.A. Palkhivala is that Mr. Justfoe Khanna should not have been superseded and he ' was made to pay the price fqr his independence and intellectual integrity. Mr. Justice. .:fi:h�nna combined those qualities with great perspicacity and modesty, remarkable dignity and grac�ous manners. The length of time for w.hich- he would have held the office of Chief Justice was not sufficieJ!.t t9 disqualify him for the highest judicial office as Mr. Justice J.C. Shah was Chief Justice only for a mont.h and a half. If the qualitie� needed in the Chief Justice were to be the real criteria, there was the strongest possible case for not super-

seding him. He yielded to ;n,9�� in "sturdy independence' ' and in his eapacity to act as tha... "watch-dog of the independence of the

judiciary.'' As regards administrative experience, he had already served with great distinction as the Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi. It could not be suggested that all the excellent qualities

•

The Emergency (i975-7�)·

115

of Mr. Justice H.R. Khanna as a judge were outweighed by the single· factor of the shortness of tenure as Chief Justice. The example of Mr. Justice Khanna shows that there ate still judges in our midst who are true to the light within them and who remain unmoved, unshaken, unseduced and unterrified. A farewell dinner in honour of Mr. Justice H.R. Khanna was organised by the Associations of all· the courts in the capital. On that occasion, Mr. Justice Khanna observed: "Jackson was not wrong when he said that the Supreme Court is not final because it is infal­ lible ; the court is infallible because it is final. The important thing, however, is tJ,iat the courts must enjoy the respect of all those who enter their precincts and inspire confidence amongst them that justice here is administered with an even hand; in any legal combat between the rich and the poor, between the mighty and the weak, between the State and the citizen, without .fear and favour." He added, "Law, it has been said, knows of no finer hour than when it cuts through formal concepts and transitory emotions to protect unpopular citizens against discrimination and persecution."

Criticism of the Judiciary It appears that persons holding high positi�ns in the Government t.ried to hold the judges to ridicule and contempt in public. On 28 October 19'16, Shri H.R. Gokhale, the Union Law Minister, while replying to the three-day discussion on the Constitution (For�y­ Fourth Amendment) Bill made certain observations about t!te judiciary.

·

(1) He stated that some·years ago a certain Member of the Rajya Sabha had made the observation that the law we,s one genera­ tion behind, the lawyers two generations behind and the judges three generations behind. He added amidst laughter that "the developments since the Rajya Sabha Member made the observation proved that the judges are not merely three generations behind but many more." (2) Referring to the judgements delivered by the Supreme Court, Shri Gokhale .stated that some of the judgements were very long, running into more than 100 and 200 pages and he added, «One does not know whether all the judges are saying the same thing or different things. Sometimes we do not know whether they are saying anything at all."

(3) Emphasizing the fact that Article 368 was being further amended to ensure against a recurrence of any confrontation between the judiciary and Parliament he hoped that the Supreme Court judges would do a bit of 11introspection," realise that the Supreme Court

History of .Moaern inilia wa.EI not after all that supreme and resist temptation to intrude into the .fields which do not legitimately belonged to them. He further ob­ served that if a confrontation recurred, "it will be bad day for the judiciary of this country." Commenting on these remai·ks, Mr . Justice V.D. Tulzapurkar, Chief Justice of Bombay High Court, said : "In all humility I would like to point qut that in making the first remark he could be said to have spoken derisively of the judiciary ; in making the second remark he could be said to have spoken contemptuously of the judiciary and in making the third remark he could be said to have indulged in giving a threat to the judiciary and the judges manhing it. Was all this really necessary to convince the Members of Parliament about the justification of the proposed constitutional �mendments 1 " Mr. Justice Tulzapurkar made tho.se obf2ervations on 16 January 1977 but not a word of what the Chief Justice said was allowed to be printed until the Indian Express of 5 F.ebruary 1977 came out with the whole of his speech.

Ban on Court Proceedings and Judgements The extent to which the Governitleht went to demolish popular faith in the judiciary was clear fro:m .the total ban imposed on reports relating to court proceedings and judgements. The blackout of news concerning the courts was inspired to impress the p�blic that they could not go to complain against the actions · of the executive. This is clear from the following concluding �e,marlts of Chief Justice TUlzapurkar : "I have referred to the censorship of Judgements deli­ vered by courts because it is of the essence of our judicial system that courts are open to the public and newspapers enlarge the area of the public which is entitled to scrutiny judicial pronouncements. Moreover, lower courts must keep themselves abreast with the latest pronouncements.''

Lawyers

_

Lawyers also became the target of the Government. There were many lawyers who protested against the imposition of . emergency and there were others who defended those who had been arrested by the police. The Government decided to pull down the lawyers' chambers in Tis Hazari Colll'ts in Old Delhi and Criminal Courts at Shahdara and Parliament Street, New Delhi. Bulldozers were employed to pull down the chambers of the lawyers. It is said that the police was present when the bulldozers crashed into the masonry: _ Walls and roofs came tumbling down. Furniture and. fittings were shattered into splinters. Electrical gadgets were

.

Pke Emergency (1975-77)

117

smashed into pieces. Files and papers dealing with the pending cases in the courts were scattered among the dust and debris. By the time the bulldozers of the Delhi Development Authority had completed their work, 200 cabins had been razed to the ground. As it was a holiday, the occupants of those lawyers' chambers were away. As the news spread, panic-stricken lawyers arrived to try to save their property. They were rougbly driven away. Many advocates, ch�sed by the police, remained in hiding for over a month. Next day, a party of the members of the Bar Association called on the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court to protest against the action of the Government. Forty-three lawyers travell� ing in the same bus were arrested by the police, 24 under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act and 19 under the Defence of India Rules. The Delhi Development Authority destroyed another 200 lawyers' cabins on the following Sunday. The remaining 500 or so chambers were removed during the vacation. A total of 58 lawyers were put in jail.

The lawyers who protested were shown blank

:MISA detention forms which had been signed by a competent magistrate. The police officer warned t�em, "If you try to go to courts, you will go to prison instead." , On 30 March 1976, the Supreme Court Bar Association passed unanimously a resolution "severely condemning the demolition of lawyers ' chambers without p.otice and the indiscriminate arrests and harassment of lawyers thereafter.'' When the members of the Bar Association boycotted the D!'Jlhi Courts, the arrested advocates were released. It is alleged that the motive for demolition of the chambers was most likely the police reprisal against the lawyers of the Delhi Courts for their obstruction of the subversion of the rule of law.

If the object of the Government was to intimidate the lawyers of Delhi, it did not succeed in doing so. There were elections of the Delhi High Court Bar Association. There were two candidates for the Presidentship of the Bar Association. One candidate was Shri D.D. Chawla who was the Vice-President of the National Forum of Lawyers and the other candidate was Shri P.N. Lekhi who was then in solitary confinement in Tihar jail. Shri D.D. Chawla was defeated and Shri P.N. Lekhi was elected as the President of the Delhi High Court Bar Association although he was in jail at that time and continued to be so. It is maintained that lawyers of India continued to hold •a :flickering candle in the gathering darkness of the Indian twilight

us

Q.istor,y of JJfodern bul/i:.a

and l:rlilillY of them had to pay the price. As the Government figures in 60% of the Supreme Court and High Court cases, the lawyers incurred the displeasure of the Government and forfeited rewarding official briefs. Shri V.M. Tarkunde, a retired judge of the Bombay High Court and practising in the Supreme Court, defended about 40 political victims and lost his position as a Senior Counsel for th� Governments of Punjab, Haryana and M�harashtra. There were other lawyer.a also who suffered in the same way. However, those lawyers who suppor,ted the Government were adequately rewarded.

Repression Duriug the Emergency, India rapidly developed into an administrative state where there were no effective checks on the func.: tioniLg of the officials. After the suspension of the fundamental rights and the weakening of the power of the judiciary to come to the rescue of the aggrieved parties, it was possible for the administra­ ctors to do whatever their bosses directed them to do. There was no opposition in the Parliament and hence there was no criticism of the Government. Complete censorship of the press blacked out all information against the Government and its officials. The slog!!>n was : "One country, One Party, One leader." Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was glorified as a symbol of the nation. India was Indira and Indira was India. ,The Government produced pictures and drawings of Mrs. Indira Gandhi to be displayed in shops and offices. Posters . were printed and displayed not only under the pictures but also on walls, on buses, on the backs of taxis and cycle rikshaws. Huge hoardings were fixed up showing Mrs. Indira Gandhi in the centre surrounded by her admirers. Front organisations were set up involving professional groups like lawyers and teachers. There was no dearth of writers, journalists, artists, lawyers and teachers who readily offered their services to further the cause of emergency. ' on'th_ese Mrs. Gandhi depended for her popularity and the legiti� macY.. of the system which she had created. Supporters of the r�gime advanced theories at seminars. It is said in one of these gatherings a senior professor of a University advanced the thesis that the Congress which began as a national movement and develop­ ed into a party, should once again traJ;J.sform itself into a national movement. The Secretariat of the Prime Minister became the visible symbol of executive authority. The Research and .Analysis Wing (RAW) functioned within its jurisdiotion. The information collected

_,

qlke'1fimergency (1975-77)

119

by RAW was largely responsible for the arrest of persons during the: night between 25 and 26 June 1975. RAW kept a close watch on every important person within the Government and outside against wliom: RAW there was the least suspicion and secret files were prepared. followed their movements and activities. People were- shadowed and telephone lines were tapped. During the emergency, thousands of people were arrested even on suspicion and kept in jails under the most disgusting con­ ditions for months together. Oncre a person was imprisoned, it was difficult for hlm to come out. Nobody cared to listen to the complaints or prayers made in their correspondence.

Lawrence Fernandes Oil 22 December 1975, the police arrested and imprisoned Michael Fernandes, the youngest brother of George Fernandes. Michael filed a petition for Habeas Corpus in February 1976. On 1 May 1976 the police arrived at the house of Alice 'Fernandes, the mother of Michael Fernandes, Lawrence and George Fernandes and took away Lawrence Fernandes. The police said that they wanted to question him about the Habeas Corpus petition. After hls initial statement, Lawrence Fernandes was subjected to the most brutal 1!1-ethods of torture till the small hours of the morning. To quote him, "There were ten of them (policemen) and they started giving me blows. Four lathis broke one after the other as they directed blows to all parts of my body. I was writhing in• pain on the floo·r. I begged, I crawled. and I begged again as they kicked me around like a football. Then they secured a wooden reaper from somewhere and dealt a few blows. It broke too. Then came the final assault. They came after me with the roQt ()£ a Banyan tree as I lay prostrate on the floor. .I oscillated between semi-consciousness and unconsciousness . It was around. 3 A.M: when I woke up asking for water. I was dying from thirst and as I begged for water, an officer asked the constables .to • urinate in the mouth but they did not do so. When I was almost out of ,breath they would wet my lips with two spoonfuls of water. My condition was so critical that they thought I might collapse any moment. .An officer asked constables to ready a jeep. •Let's throw this guy before a running train and say he committed suicide,' I heard the officer telling hls men. By now I was a shattered being. I had fractures all over the left part of my body and my thighs ached like hell. My legs and hands were swollen.'' This was not the end of his troubles. He was kept in solitary -confinement in police lock-ups in the most unhygienic conditions, in hell-holes

·

120

History of Moilern Inilin

infested with bugs and cockroaches . He was kept without food for three days and was not permitted to smoke. He was completely shattered in body and mind.

Letter of Alice Fernandes to President

On 24 May 1976, Mrs. Alice Fernandes addressed the foilowing letter to the President of India and sent copies of it to 26 persons including Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, the Minister for Home Affairs and the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore : «It is with a heavy heart that I am writing this letter with the hope of obtaining justice at your hand. I am 65 years old and my 75-yel}r-old husband is a heart patient. My third son, Michael Fernandes, has been detained under the MISA since December 1975. «On Saturday, May 1, at about 6 p .m. my 44-yeal'-old second son, Lawrence Fernandes, was taken away from our residence by the police. They began questioning him about the whereabouts of my eldest son, George Fernandes, and then subj�cted him in a most inhuma.n, reckless and ruthless manner to ·third degree methods of physical torture. Besides beating him with clubs (until five of them were broken to pieces) they used a Banyan tree root to clout him with and booted him and slapped him. They threatened that if he did not reveal the whereabouts of George F�rnandes he would be thrown on the railway track and killed under a moving train, leaving no evidence of their hand in his death. After thus reducing him to a condition of a physical and nervous wreck, he was kept in solitary confinement in different police lookups in the most unhygienic conditions until May 20 during which period he was subjected to further torture and interrogation. He was kept without food for three days and was not given proper food on other days, nor allowed cigarettes. During all these 20 days he was allowed bath only on three days and made to remain in the same clothes in which · he was when he taken away on May 1. He had become unconscious as a result of this inhuman treatment. He was taken to different doctor.a and hospitals, each time under a different and false name impersonating him as a police officer, for treatment to keep him alive. On one night a doctor was brought to the police station itself for treating him. . «On May 9, my son was taken by police car to Davangere and on May 10 produced before the Magistrate as though arrested in Davangere on the previous day. «He was continuously interrogated, refused lawyers' help and not, allowed to contact home. He was threatened with dire conse­ quences if he reported to the Magistrate about the torture. Finally

Phi Emergenc?J

(1975-"1r)

.... ..,.,_

121

·

on May 20 he was produced in the 211d Metropolitan Magistrate's Chambers during lunch time and then removed to the Bangalore Central prison where he has been detained in a· cell meant for condemned criminals. «The whereabouts of my son Lawrence had not been informed to us. On May 20 upon being informed by a lawyer, I went to the prison with the lawyer but was not allowed to meet my son. On the . 2lst, after waiting for over three hours I waf!. ta�en to the cell to see ·him, but not the lawyer. I found him looking dead. He was unable to move except with two persons helping him about and then too . with great pain and limping. His left side is crippled and he is unable to talk freely without faltering. He had lost at least 20 Kg. during these 20 days. ••Yet another page was added to this act by serving on him on May 22 an order of detention under MISA, under which also he has been kept in the same cell. «Are my two sons being held hostages for George Fernandes whose whereabouts or condition my entire family is totally unaware of � Is it morally right that my family should He so harassed and tormented for the political views held by my son, George Fernandes � «Whatever I have stated here is on the b._asis of what the family could gather from Lawrence during the visits to him in the cell. For obvious reasons it is not. quite exhaustive. I urge you in the name of all that is good in civilised conduct of human beings and their Governments, and in the name. of justice to order a thorough juqicial enquiry into tb.is barbaric torture etc., and take suitable action against t�e concerned authorities. "l also urge that he should be transferred to a good hospital and specialist medical and psychiatric treatment be given to him and daily visits to him by the family allowed so that he may regain his mental and-physical health and become a human bemg." In spite of this petition, nothing came out of it and Lawrence Fernandes conti-· nued to suffer during the Emergency. •

·

Snehalata Pattabhiraman Reddy was a famous Kannada Film Producer of Bangalore. He had recently produced a famous film called Samskara. Hi� wife Snehalata was a well-known Kannada actress and she appeared in this film and was very much praised by the critics. She was a Socialist. She knew George Fernandes and his family. · When George Fernandes could not be arrested, Snehalata was arrested and imprisoned in Bangalore. At :first she was charged -qnder the

"122

History of Mod.em".ln{J_ia

Indian Penal Code and later on, under the MISA. She was given C class and put through humiliating treatment.

Her family, when

they visited the prison, were horrified by her condition.

been put in a cell with prostitutes and female criminals.

· was on the floor by,an open and much-used latrine.

She had Her bed

She was an

asthmatic and under prison conditions, her health declined rapidly.

Her daughter and husband made frequent trips to Delhi to try and see Prime Minister lI/,dira Gandhi and persuade her to either improve

Snehalata's conditions in prison or to release her.

She was already

a patient of Asthma and while in prison, she developed

ailment.

a heart

Five days after her release, she died following a massive

heart attack on

25

January

1977.

Gayatri Devi Maharani Gayatri Devi. was a Member of Lok Sabha.

her son Lt. Col.

She and

(Retired) :Bhiwani Singh were arrested under the

Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling

Activities Act (COFEPOSA).

She was treated as a C class prisoner

and lodged in very unclean surroundings with no fan and no running

water b�t swarms of mosquitoes.

The people there in open space, in

front of her room, eased themselves in the open drain.

About the

jail people around her, there was a woman who was stark naked and covereQ. only With flj.es, and a lunatic woman who muttered aU the

day long and threw stones at every one.

was unbearable.

When in jail, she

The food supplied to her

made several representations to Finance

Minister C. Subramanyam and Pranab Mookerji to review her case

but there was no response. Her lawyers filed writ petitions in the High Court of Delhi but those could not be pursued because of the new law relating to Habeas Corpus petitions.

At a later stage, she

was asked to withdraw 'the petit.ion as a pre-condition for release on

parole. Her lawyers and family members insisted that due to her

failing health, · she should apply for a parole after the jail doctors had advised her hospitalisation. She was then lodged in the G.B .

Pant Hospital for a gall bladder operation.

Rajmata Scindia of Gwalior was also arrested and put in the

same Tihar Jail in Delhi:

She was also given the same treatement as

was given to Maharani Gayatri Devi.

Her surroundings were also

the same.

Jayaprakash Narayan The

treatment

given

to

Jayaprakash Narayan during his

. detention was unnecessarily harsh taking into consider&.tion the fact

The· Emergency

(1975-'77)

12:3

that he was an ailing man. It appears that he·was punished for creating all t4e trouble for the rGovernment. Describing the condi_. tions in which he lived 9-uring the 130 days of his detention, Jayaprakash Narayan wrote thus in a letter to a friend : 'U remained comple�ely isolated. The total isolation was very painful to me." There was no one with whom he could converse freely. The lonliness caused "a kind of mental tortJ.ll'e ". He asked the Government authorities to allow one of the m�hy thousands of persons arrested to be with him so that he could ha�e a cong�nial companion with whow he could exchange his ideas. �owever, his request was not accepted. Ultimately, the Governme:nt allowed Guiab Yadav, a personal servant of Jayaprakasp. N�rayan, to stay w;ith him in detention. However, �hat JP required was a companion and not a personal servant. .Armed sentries were posted on either side of hfs room. He was not allowed to tali:e walks in the open "which would have been good for my heart condition." The Government finally released him on 12 November 1975 "when it became clear that the disease I was affiicted with could not be diagnosed and that the chances of my survival were slender." Even then, the Government announced that he had been released on parole,

Rajan There was a double-storeyed building in Trivandrum which was one of the most notorious torture chambers in the country. It was the headquarters of the Crime Branch of Kerala police, Rajan was a student of the Regional Engineering College in Calicut. He was taken into custody by the Crime Branch in a pre-dawn 13woop on the hostel on I March 1976. .After that, no one heard of him and he was actually disposed of by the police.

Vijayan Nair Vijayan Nair was running a book-stall at Varkala, On 5 March 1976 he was taken into police custody in broad daylight from the busy East Fort bus-stop in Trivandrum city. He was taken to the Headquarters of the Crime Branch of Kerala police and made to share ' a cell with five others for about 10 days. It is said that he was so badly tortured and his body mutilated that it would have been embarrassing for the police to produce him before the public,

Hemant Kumar Vishnoi Hemant Kumar Vishnoi, Secretary of the Delhi University Stu­ dents' Union, was arrested along with a group of other students from the Buddha Jayanti Park in New Delhi . He was hung upside down by the police and beaten up. The soles of his feet were scorched by can-

124

' History of MoOern India

dles. Chilli powder mixed with water was forced into his nostrils and ·rectum. In spite of this treatment, he refused to confess that there was any plot against the Prime Minister.

Jawaharlal Nehru University The police in Delhi wanted to arrest Devi Prasad, the President of the Students' Union of Jawaharlal Nehru University as he had obstructed Mrs. Menaka GanQ.hi, wife of Sanjay Gandhi, from attending her German class in the . Jawaharla1 Nehru University. However, instead of arresting Devi Prasad, the police arrested Shri Pravir Purkayastia, a Ph.D. student of the Jawaharla1 Nehru University and put him under detention. Although it was brought to the notice of the police that it was a case of wrong identity and hence Pravir Purkayastia be releaaed but in spite of that he had to languish in jail for about one year.

Mrs. Lewis ,

Mrs. Lewis was arrested and kept in detention for over a year. She was a social worker and she had led an agitation at Mehrauli along' with other social workers that minimum wages should be paid to a:U the labourers employed in the farms near Mehrauli. The Union Home Minister thrice recommended the case of Mrs. I.:ewis for release but she was not released. Mr. Kishen Chand, the Lieu­ tenant-Gov�rnor of Delhi, took no steps to release her.

Prof. Keny· Prof. L.B. Kel}.y, a member of the Executive Council of the Indian History Congress, wrote thus from Y�rvada Central Prison, Poona on 12 December 1975 : "T regret very much my inability to attend the 36th session of the Indian History Congress as I was arrested on 1 November 1975 under MISA,. though I am not a mem­ ber of any political party nor any group of smugglers. I was brought here straight from the library of Bombay University; may be that being the President of the Bombay University Teachers' Union I was given this treatment. Man proposes and MISA disposes If you get my paper for the Symposium and find it worthwhile, kindly arrange to read it. " A resolution was passed at the Indian History Congress for his release but it had. no effect: .••

Arrest of Officers Ten junior officers of the Union Government were arrested in June 1975 and detained under MISA for 9 months. Two of them were Customs Inspectors and the rest were Textile Officers. It was alleged again1:1t them tht they h&d refused to clear 8t consignment

Phe :Emergency (1975-'t'l) in which the Mother of Menaka Gandhi was interested. The wives and relatives of the unfortunate officers knocked all .possible doors

but those officers were not released. The wives and children of those

officers suffered terribly in the absence of their husbands. They were released from jail in February 1977 when it was reported by

the CBI that the charges of owning disproportionate assets could not. be substantiated against them. Mr. Yadav1 one of the officers arrested, told the Shah Commission that his w.ife had been turned

into a nervous wreck during the 9 months of his detention, his father had lost his eye-sight and the education of his children had been interrupted.

Tortures It is pointed out that when people were arrested during the emergency, no case was registered against them. They were kept in illegal confinement for a few days and were subjected to various kinds of physical torture such as stamping on the bare body with heeled boots, beating with canes on the bare soles of feet, rolling a heavy stick on the body with a policeman sitting on either side of it, making the victim crouch for hours in a •Z' position, beating on the spine, slapping with hands on both ears until the victim bleeds and loses consciousness, beating with rifle butt, inserting live electric wires into body crevices,

forcing the victim to lie nude on

ice slabs, singeing the victim's body with lighted cigarettes. and candle flame, denying food, water and sleep and then forcing the­ victim to drink his own urine, stripping the victim, blackening his

face and parading him in public, suspending the victim by his wrists, - ha'uling him on •aeroplane' i.e., the victim's hands are·

tied b.ehind his back with a long rope, the end hauled over a pulley, leaving the viothn dangling in mid-air swinging etc. The police of Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala and Madhya Pradesh displayed a special aptitude for such conduct. In West Bengal the Satyagra­

his were treated like criminals and lodged with criminals at Siliguri, Alipur, Midnapur and Bankura. The speciality of Rajasthan was the administration of electric shocks to po.litioal detainees in addition: to severe. beatings. In Haryana, the arrested Satyagrahis were para-· ·

ded in the streets with their shoes on their heads, beaten with rods, ' kicked and humiliated.

Jails Life in jail during the emergency was not absolutely alike for all political leaders and the lesser fry. The authorities kept the leaders like Jayaprakash Narayan and Shri Morarji Desai in soJi.

iM tary

iiistor?J of .Moliern inaia_ confinement and provided them with suitable accommodation

either in hospital or in

a Rest

House. The others were

huddled

togeiiher.

Probably

because

the

number of women political prisoners

taken into custody was less as compared to men, separate arrange­ ments were seldom made for women and they were lodged

prostitutes

and insane women.

The

film star Snehalata

with

was a

patient of .Asthma and she requested that she be allowed to stroll outside the prison but that

was not permitted.

A

sensitive person

like her could be expected to collapse which she did.

Chaudhury Brahm Prakash who was detained in a Bihar jail,

says : uit is natural for a fit person to become sick if he is treated not like a human-being but an item: In the Patna prison where I

was lodged, some of us

could not sleep for many nights. If one had

a cough, the medicine might turn up after

3

months. The doctor

was available but very often medicines were not. Corruption which had increased greatly during the emergency could be expected to

make

itself felt within prison

very bad quality rations.

walls

also.

We were doled out

Successive complaints might have imp­

roved matters for a day or two but they were soon back to

where

they were. One had to be really aggressive to get any change out of the Jail officials. One of :the functions

the jail officials performed

.admir11-bly was to make the political prisoners fight among them­ selves. They would instigate them.

This was sometimes followed �y

Lathi charges which took place in many jails."

In Tihar jail in New Delhi, a large number of leaders were lodged after

hostel life in

the emergency in

the various wards.

the

beginning and it was like

The food

was not good but

the arrested persons could converse with one another. However,

things changed after the escape. of a dozen non-political prisoners on the Holl day.

Shri Charan Singh,

Mohan among others were

Shri .Asoka Mehta and Surindar

transferred to a jail in Rohtak. Shri Nanaji Deshmukh and RSS workers were sent to Ambala. Virender

Kapoor, a young Delhi Journalist picked up from the Red Fort

while he was on professional duty, was sent to Bareilly. He was made

to spend

23

days in a dark cell to undergo solitary confine­

ment . .All rules of the Jail Manual were flouted as usually five days is the maximum period of solitary confinement prescribed for har­ dened criminp,ls. The fault of Virender

Kapoor was that he spoke

up at Red Fort when some Jan Sangh workers were being roughly handled by the police. His j11il term first under Defence of India

Rules and later under MISfl. lasted

fol" about 8

months.

\

Tlie Emergency (197$-'i't) In some of the most primitive prisons, many political detenus were lodged in Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. A jail in Fatehgarh had no electricity to start with. It was infested with mos.: quitoes and the food was uneatable. The women detenus were not spared. Mrs. Mrinal Gore was lodged along with leprosy-stricken persons and Mrs. Pushpa Kale underwent tortw:e. Socialist and Jan Sangh workers appeared to have come in for a measure of tor­ ture and ill-treatment. The leaders of the political parties in jails were treated better than the rank and file. The intention was to demoralise party workers. Long months in jail led to frayed nerves. There was some bickering and exchange of hot words bet­ ween the representatives of different parties. It appears that the Government had a well-planned scheme to treat different people differently. If Mr. Piloo mody found jail conditions "reasonably comfortable," such was not the case for George Fernandes. When he was arrested on 10 June 1976, he was taken in chains to the office of the CID Deputy Commissioner. There he was made to sit on a hard chair from 4.30 P.M. to 6 A. M. From 10 June to 14 June 1 976, he was kept locked up in a dungeon at the Red Fort and not even allowed to have a bath or wipe the . sweat from his brow. He was deprived of his handkerchief for "security reasons." He was locked up in Hissar Jail in a barrack with iron gratings. There was no protection against the piercing hot winds or the monsoon. He was brought to the court with handcuffs on.

Resistance When the emergency was imposed and most of the leaders were arrested, there was no immediate reaction from the public. The speed with which action was tak'en by the Government under the emergency, stunned the public. There were no millions to protest against the arrest of Jayaprakash Narayan and other leaders. It must be admitted that the leaders had not organised a plan of resistance or their future and the result was that the movement was almost frittered away in the initial stages. Rowever, with the passage of time, the movement gathered momentum and there was a lot of activity against the Government in the country. The leaders who had gone underground and were not arrested, organised the public resistance against the Government. There were two spurts of Satyagraha staged in Delhi and other cities, one fortnight-long in June 1975 and the other of equal duration in November 1975. The underground workers used different methods to circulate themselves and their wares. Very often, young gir:ls and women

i28

ltistory of Moclern inclia

were employed to carry the illicit literature. published by the Opposi­ tion for distribution amongst the people. When male underground men moved about, they not I only, disguised themselves, but were accompanied by a woman, preferably with a child in arms. They used sma;ll portable printing and cyclostyling machines. 1\fost of the stencils were cut by hand by a Bengali or South Indian girl knowing Hindi in order to lessen the chances of suspicion. These girls were changed frequently. The workers never moved about in a taxi but used either a public transport, bus or a scooter. •

Janata Samachar One of the major activities of the underground movement was the preparation and circ�ation of bulletins, pamphlets and news­ sheets among the people. One of the earliest of these publications entitled Janata Samachar :was dated 28 June 1975-just two days after the declaration of emergency. It was a single cyclostyled sheet with !lo.fixed periodicity. It gave bits of information such as the whereabouts of the leaders who were arrested, protests or banilhs in differe:µt parts of the country arfd explained what Jayaprakash Narayan really said with regard to the right of the army and the · police "to disobey orders. _ These news-sheets referred to events and developments in various parts of the country. These bits of infor­ mation acted as morale-boosters for those who hoped that "something . would happen" to restore the.lost freedoms of the people.

Pamp:&let of July 1975 One pamphlet supposed to have been circulated in July 1975 from 7, Jantar Mantar Road, New Delhi from the Lok Sangharsh Samiti Central Office was an open Jetter to "Dear .Brothers and Sis­ ters." The letter was signed �y Nanaji Deshmukh who had not yet been arrested. The printed names. on the letter heaCI. included those of 1\forarji Desai as President, Nanaji Deshmukh as Secretary and Asoka Mehta as Treasurer. The letter said : "From 1857, it took ninety years to liberate our motherland. For tlus cherished goal, our fathers and mothers suffered ·untold tribulation and made count­ less sacrifices. Men and women in their prime of life went gallantly to their execution. Young boys and girls bravely faced bullets. Patriots were exiled from their own dear motherland. Thousands suffered privation and destitution in jails for years together. But, for the freedom of the nation, not one of them wilted under pressure of the foreign rulers. "Freedom was won in 1947. Centuries of slavery came to an end, India rose proudly amongst the comity 9f nations as the world's lar-

Ffrhe Emergency (107S-'l�)

129

gest democracy. Other countries under tile yoke of imperialism looked towards us for inspiration in their darkness. Every person iii Oll,;l' count:ry glowed in his realized dream. The Indian 'citizen wa's now free and endowed with inalienable fundamental rights. «But in the early hours of June 26, 1975, one individual, Mrs. Indira Gandhi, in her psychotic desire to remain Prime Minister bet­ rayed i;he nation and the priceless sacrifices of earlier generations. Under the guise of internal Emergency, the people of India have once again been subjugated, this time by a native despot.

-

«These Hitlerian acts of despotism have sought to be hidde:p. from,the public eye by imposition of a press censorsb:ip. Now only official lies, falsehoods, and half-truths can be printed in newspapers. Even under British Imperialism, this kind of censorship was not clamped. The nation in those days knew through newspapers of the ar.rests of national leaders, t.he protests of the people in various parts of the country, the progress of Subhash Bose's INA and this too at a, time when our leaaers had openly avowed to overthrow the British Indian Government, and while Britain was involved in World War II. Obviously Mrs. Gandhi is even more desperate for she knows that she does not enjoy the confidence of nation, and the real news has to be kept away from th� people. «In the 9! years that Mrs. Indira Gandhi has been Prime Minister, shortages, pestilence and starvation have increased. Injustice, immorality and corruption have multiplied. Inflation, unemployment and disparity have pushed the people to destitution. Fraud and bribery have C1rossed all limits. Rank opportunism and naked lust for· office have ruined national politics. At every level� Mrs. Gandhijs stewardship of the nation has only led to deterioration."

Satya Samachar Each State sent a courier to Delhi once a fortnight for the purpose of pooling news and bulletins were posted to 20,000 persons. Satya Samachar was a fortnightly, issued from Delhi on 12 and 26 of .each month. This fortnightly functioned effectively for 6 months from 11.2 June, 1976 until the police raided its underground office. Each i.iisue had 16 to 20 pages, foolscape size, typed and cyclostyled. It carried the messages of Jay:aprakash Narayan, lists of martyrs who died in jails and other vital information about the ac�vities of the movement calculated to keep up the morale of the workers both in jails an.d outside". This sheet was edited by Shri V.P. Bhatia, _ · :. ' :. � .Editci� of: the Organis�r untfrit- '\yas. ;forced to ·close down. 1.9-::-mir .

..

..

..

.

6

·-

History of Moriern india

130

The editorial policy of Satya Samachar was explained in its first issue dated 12 June 1976 in these words : «Jn this ventm:e, the emphasis will always be on truth. Our self.imposed code will forbid incitement to violence, to communal passions and to ·anti-social behaviour ; we .will scrupulously avoid character assassination and �endentious writing. Our constant endeavour will be to remind people that a personal dictatorship is working to perpetuate itself and that they have to fight for it. Today's fighters will command tomorrow­ not for power, but for justice ; not for politics, but for ethics ; not for the domination of India, but for her grandeur."

Number of arrests

'

The other well-known state bulletins were Janavani "and Mashal from Delhi, Darpan from Varanasi, Vajrayug from Hyderabad, .Asli Samachar from Bombay and Satya Barta from Gauhati. George Fernandes issued his own journal from his hideout. 7,000 workers were arrested for circulating the underground literature. In the two-month Satyagraha, 80,000 persons were arrested-15,000 in Karnataka, 91000 in Kerala, 8,000 each in Bihar and U.l>. and 5,000 in Delhi. The total figure of political prisoners of all kinds was 1,40,000.

Illicit Literature The illicit literature consisting of pamphlets, leaflets and cyclo­ styled sheets was often distribt!-ted through Government despatch sections, in Government despatch vehicles concealed between bundles of Government publicity material, sometimes put in covers meant for family planning folders and pamphlets.

Gorwala's «Opinion" There were many people in the country who refused to surren­ der or compromise or coopei:ate with the Government and they carried on the resistance against the Government. Shri .A.D. Gorwala con.. tinued to publish his paper entitled "'Opinion" till the time came when no press was ,prepared to print it. Wlien that happened, Shri Gorwala sent a cyclostyled sheet to his subscribers. In one of those sheets, he said : «What then are we to do, we the comparative few wlro still cherish freedom, who cannot give up the vision of a free Indian people, living freely as their forefathers never did in histori­ cal memory except for the brief period from 1947 to 1975, managing their own affairs themselves, free of dictators, self-seeking and tyr�n­ nical, or even on occasion benevolent ? In our circumstances with no other means !)OSsible, there can be o;tly one answer. Dogged, Deter­ mined Dissent. For the opposition politicians, this means the

Plie Emergency (1975-77)

131

formation·6f a single party with buf; a single aim , F�eedom, and the taking of all measures to frustrate the dictator who has destroyed freedom and proposes, under possible guises, to stamp out its members. For ordinary citizens, it means examining the dictator's statements and actions with insight and reserve, refusing to accept the lies pou­ red out, refusing to take part in her activities or to go in her meetings and those of her myrmidons, developing an attitude of healthy scep­ ticism, and maintaining in one's mind and heart the spirit of freedom. Whether any .worthwhile results will follow externally I do not know ; but I do know that for true women and men, the real Indians, no­ thing else makes anysense. The issue is simple, Slavery or Freedom."

Usha Mehta Throughout the emergency, Usha Mehta, Prof. of Politics at the University of Bombay, continued to work incessantly for civil liperties and was in fact one of the leaders of the underground movement.

C.G.K. Reddy Shri C.G.K. Reddy, a consultant to the Hindu, threw himself heart and soul into the resistance movement against the Government. Later on, he was involved in the famous Baroda Dynamite Conspi­ racy case. The main centres of resistance were located in Delhi, Patna, Bombay, Ahmedabad, Baroda and Madras. To begin with, the federal structure helped the resistance movement.

Tamil Nadu Tamil Nadu was under the rule of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) with Shri Karunanidhi as Chief Minister. Soon after the imposition of emergency, the DMK party met on 27 June

1975

and passed resolutions demanding the revocation of the emergency and the release of tho.se arrested. The DMK was "pained to note that the recent approach adopted by the Ruling Congress and the methods practised by the Prime Minister, Mrs. Indira Gandhi, have tended to put out the light of democracy and lead 'the · country into the gloom of ·dictatorship." It "welcomed the -progressive· measures · brought forward by Mrs. Gandhi and also extended its cooperation. " However, the resolution ·accused her of indulging in propaganda-against opposition parties and holding them

responsible for.·the non-iniplerilentation,Of ·progressive 'measures for : the eradication of poverty. The 'reseiution asked, ·"l?oes this mean 'iiliat m: S6a£es lire 'Tamil ' Nauu;·. Kei'alar' · and · Gujarat . \vliere 'the Chlef Mili isters are from tile Opposition� the Goverhm.ent reJ?udiaies

132

History of Modern iniiia

measures for the uplif'tment of the poor? 1 1 The resolution added: "Hiding the image of truth; standing in the shadows of falsehood; }laving prepared schemes for stifling the opposition parties, going in search for imaginary reasons for implementing such schemes1 and hurling calumnies; calling anything a.nd everything as conspiracy, foreign contact reactionaries, Mrs. Gandhi has inaugurated the advent of dictatorship in the early morning of 26 June 1975, casting everlasting slur on the Indian people. She has incarceratea on the pretext of internal security, people who rallied around as one to save the country from external aggression. Patriots who bore the pain of sacrifice for winning freedom for the .la:ri:"d have been awarded with prison life under Indira's Rule. Is there. any need for thi� emergency which leads the country on the ·path of dictatorship when there are several laws to penalise conspirators, violent elements and intemperate speakers and writers 1 Is it good to bring the country under a spell of dictatorship in the name of defending democracy?" On 6 July 1975, a mammoth public meeting was held on the Madras Beach to explain the resolutions adopted by the Executive Council of the DMK. At the end_of Karunanidhi's spirited speech, the whole of the audience numbering about 5 lakhs stood up to take· the following pledge administered by hirtJ. : «We solemnly affirm that we would not hesitate in any manner to safeguard India's democracy, whatever be the odds against us and whatever be the crisis that confronts us. This vast assemblage of the people of Tamil Nadu requests the Prime Minister of India to fulfil its .demands that the national leaders now in detention be set at liberty and the legitimate rights of the Pre�s re.stored. Long live demo� cracy.'' The DMK held its conference at Coimbatore in December 1975. The Times of India reported on 5 December 1975 that the biggest crowds ever seen in Coimbatore thronged 5-mile route of a long and colourful procession taken out by the DMK. The Coimba­ tore Conference did not look like that of a party on its last legs. It is pointed out that Karunanidhi was not the only obstacle ill the way of the take-over of Tamil Nadu by the Central @overn_. ment. The enormous pre1:1tige of Kamaraj also stood in the way. Kamaraj W3i$ not happy about the decJaratio.n 9f emergency in the country. He gave expression to his feelings on different occasion&.. At a publig �meeting !lit Sholingar, Kamaraj declared, "I am shocked to hear that leaders have been arrested throughout the coUn.try. This state of affairs is not good. for the natibn What •••

Pke Emergency

(1975-77)

133

happens in Delhi we are not able to know. The Radio does not give correct news. Newspapers are not giving correct news . . Such event has no parallel even under British rule." In an interview with students at Tiruvellore, Kamaraj is reported to have �aid, c cI feel as though I have been left in the jungle blind-folded. I cannot visualise the consequences of the emergency. Can anyone e\'en imagine that such an emergency would be proclaimed . . . During the 1911 election, I had expressed my apprehension that ' there was danger to democracy. Mr. Karunanidhi and Mrs. Gandhi, who were then in alliance, scoffed at me. What I said in 1971 is happening in 1975." Kamaraj died on 2 Octoher 1975 and Prime Minister Indira Gandhi attended the funeral and later on declared that Kamaraj .. wanted the merger of the Congress, On 31 January 1976 the Central Government took over the administration of Tan:iil Nadu after accusing the State Government of misrule and disobed.ience of emergency laws. At the time of the di�mis, sal of Karunanidhi's Government, it had a strength of 166 members in a House of 234:. On 31 January, the CRP contingents moved into Tamil Na.du to bring it under control. Tamil Nadu was brought under President's rule. On 14 February 1976, Mrs. Indira Gandhi drove in an open car under decorated arches bearing portraits of herself and Kamaraj to open the Kamaraj Memorial at Guindy in Madras. She declared that the merger was the cclast wish" of Kamaraj. Paying a tribute to Kamaraj, Mrs. Indira Gandhi observed, "For me, it was a privilege to work with him. I sought his guidance and we discussed almost eyery matter of importance."

Gujarat When the emergency was declared in June 1975; there was a United Front Ministry in power in Gujarat with Shri Babubhai · Patel as Chief Minister. On account of the attitude of the State Government, the people did not suffer as a result of the imposition of emergency. Chief Minister Babubhai Patel had participated in the Opposition rallies held in Ahmedabad before 25 June 1975. From the very beginning, the Government of Gujarat was opposed to the emergency. On 26 July 1975, anti-Government demonstra..; tions were held throughout the state of Gujarat although the emergency laws prohibited rallies. At one of those meetings at Ahmedabad, Chief Minister Babubhai Patel vowed to wage a campaign against Mrs. Indira Gandhi's authorit(l.ri(l.n Government

134

History of Modern India

«until our fundamental liberties" were restored. He referred to similar rallies which were being held in the 18 districts of the State and declared that he had allowed his people to speak against the Prime Minister and the police would not step in. He also disclosed that 709 persons had been arrested in Gujarat but most of them had been released. Prof. K.D. Desai of the Gujarat University was right in saying: "We do not feel the effect of the emergency." The people from different parts · of India took refuge in the State of Gujarat to save themselves from harassment and imprisonment. The Union Government built a "case" against Guj�rat on the issue of ••clandestine" literature being produced in the State and the discovery of dynamite which was allegedly being sent to Varanasi. In October, November and December 1975, the Jana.ta Front . Government won important civic elections in Rajkot, Baroda, Surat, Broach and :finally the Ahm.edabad Municipal Corporation. " On 2 February 1976, Hitendra Desai, leader of the Congress Party in Gujarat, launched an attack on the Government condemning its inability to maintain law and order in the State and resisting the emergency regulations. The Janata Front lost its majority in the State Assembly when its partner the KMLP was dissolved by defections on 11 February 1976. It was defeated oh··a Budgetary demand in the Assembly on 12 March 1976. The Govermµent of the State was taken over by the Central Government and President's rule was established.

Kashmir Sheikh Abdullah was the Chief Minister of the State of Jammu and Kashmir when the emergency was proclaimed in the country. He kept himself aloof. He refrained from joining the chorus of praise around Prime Minister Mrs 'Indira Gandhi. He spoke of national -re­ conciliation and told the newsmen on 20 September 1975, «J;;f I can be of any use to the Prime Minister in this regard, my services are at her disposal." He resisted the pres�ure of the Congress for the merger of his party in the Congress Party. He insisted on maintaining the National Conference under whose banner he had fought against the rule of the Maharaja. He was determined to maintain a separate identity for the National Conference. The Congress could merge with it if it so wished. At a public meeting at Lal Chowk, he declared, ·"Power was handed over to me when the ship of State was on the point of sinking with the loads of corruption and mal-administration. · We are not oblig!'ld to those who vacated office in our favour. It is they who should be obliged to us because we are being obliged tQ

�

-The Flmergency (1975-77)

135

carry the mess created by them. Noone voluntarily gives up power. If someone does so, · it is only to· save himself.from·the deluge. My Government is determined to root out corruption. Its extent and

ramifications at the moment would frighten even the devil. The image of the Congress in the State is far from healthy. But we want no confrontation with Congress."

It is true that the State of Jammu and Kashmir is a sensitive . border State but the Union Government did not take over the administration of the State unlike Tamil Nadu or Gujarat. Shri

Abdullah was firmly settled in the saddle. While referring to the massive security arrangements �t the meetings of the Prime Minister, Shri Abdullah said at a public meeting at Udhampur on 13 March 1976 that he objected to police barricades separating him from the crowd. He said that the worst that co�ld happen was an assassin's bullet and he would prefer that to being kept at a distance from

the people. There was not much effect of emergency on the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

Citizens for Democracy There were many organisations which were working for freedom

during the emergency and the most influential among them was the Citizens for 'Democracy which had been formed in 1974 under the Presidentship of Jayaprakash Narayan with Shri V.M. Tarkunde as Secretary. The Citizens for Democracy organised an all-India Civil

Liberties Conference at Ahmedabad on. 12 October 1975. The conference was inaugurated by Shri M.C. Chagla and presided over by Shri' J.C. Shah, former Chief Justice of India. In his powerful and moving speech, Shri M.C. Chagla recalled the great ideals w�ch had inspired the constitution of India and showed how Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was involved in a conspiracy "to put the leaders in jail, to have a press censorship and to deprive the people of India of

their civil 1iberties." The Citizens for Democracy derived much of its strength from the inspiring leadership of J&yaprakash Narayan who was arrested on 26 June 1975 but released on parole on 12 November 1975 on grounds of health. The Citizens for Democracy held its annual general meeting at Bombay on 19 and 20 June

1976.

On 15 August 1975, the •Free JP' campaign in England, with Philip Noel Baker as Chairman, published a full-page advertisement in The Times of London which said� «Don't let the light go out on r'J:ndian democracy."

'�

136

History of Moaern Inaia

Role of RSS The Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh was the backbone of the underground resistance movement. Although this organisation was banned, its popularity and influence increased. In spite of all the precautions taken by the Government, the secret operations of the RSS spread rapidly after June 1975. There were thousands of RSS wor:kers who were arrested but thousands also went underground and worked in close cooperation with the Lok Sangharsh Samiti. An underground network of communications was established and infor­ mation relating to developments in '}"arious states was collected. The RSS provided information for the underground leaflets and bulle­ tins. It produced or helped to produce several boo�lets and pamphlets and many of them had a wide circulation. They were about 30 in all. Pamphlets were distributed in universities and colleges, cinema theatres, seminars and conferences. They were slipped through the doors of residences at night. They even reached the delegates of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference which met in Delhi i,n October 1975. About the work of the RSS, a writer observed: ' It offered the maximum contribution and sac:i;ifi.ces at the altar of. freedom and human dignity and was the backbone of the resistance movement."

The Akalis TP.e Akalis also played an important part in the resistance movement against the emergency. They launched a big movement to agitate against the emergency. On the day of Amavas (Moonless night} five of their most important leaders, viz., Prakash Singh Badal, Gurcharan Singh Tohra, Atma Singh, Jagdev Singh Talwandi and Basant Singh Khalsa, addressed a huge congregation in front of Akal Ta1ilit and prayed to God to help them in their objective of removing the em�rgency. They called the emergency as unnecessary, iniquitous and a. punitive measure. They came out of the Golden Temple, went through the Bazars, passed in front of the JallianwaJa Bagh and reached in front of Dharam Singh market, shouting slo­ gans against emergency. The police arrested all the five leaders and took them away. The Akalis waited for some time to watch the reaction of the Government. After that, 50 to 70 Akalis daily courted arrest against ·emergency. The police took.all ·of them in their vans and shut some of them in jails and released others on account of the lack of accommodation. Mangal Singh Tur was the dictator of the Morcha.,

(.j#li

The Emergency

(1976-77)

137

On 13 .April 1976, the Baisakhi day, Mohan Singh Ttlr courted arrest along with 101 other Sikhs. Sant Har Charan Singh then became the dictator of the Morcha. The arrests continued every. day without any break. Warrants were issued against Sant Har Charan Singh but he could not be arrested because he did not move out o� the premises of the Sikh Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee building. ·The Morcha went on till the emergency was relaxed, leaders were released and elections were announced. Till then, 43,472 Sikhs had been arrested in connection with the emergency. There was no news about the Akali Morcha in the newspapers.

The Baroda Dynamite Conspiracy Case (1976-77) A reference may be made to the Baroda DynamHe conspiracy case. The charge-sheet in that case was filed in the Court of Shri Mohd. Shamim, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi. There were 25 accused in all including George Fernandes, Prabhu Das Patwari, C.G.K. Reddy _and others. It was stated in the charge-sheet that on the night intervening 8/9-3-1976, police at Baroda city, on receiving reliable information that some explosive material meant · for being transported outside the state was lying in the godown of M/s Road Link 'of India, at Baroda, searched the premises of the said transport company whereupon 7 wooden c\�tes containing 836 nitroglycerine sticks of Torch Brand S.G. 80 manufactured by the Indian Explosives Limited, Gomia a,nd 85 rolls of fuse wire were . racovered. A case was registered and investigation was taken over .by the C.B.I. on 23·3·76. While investigation was in progress, the Delhi police also. registered two cases. One of them related to the recovery of 37 dynamite sticks, 49 detonators and 8 rolls of safety fuse wire. It was found that the two cases of Delhi °liad a link with the case relating to the recovery of dynamite sticks at Baroda. On 26·6·76, there was an explosion at Railway Bridge, Bombay. ,Some persons were arrested and their interrogation revealed that dynamite sticks and other explosive materials were procured by the accused from Baroda. All the four cases of Baroda, Delhi and Bombay were entrusted to C.B.I. Investigation showed that on the declaration of emergency in the country on 25·6·75, George Fernandes went underground and decided to arouse resistance against the imposition of the same and to overawe the Government by use and show of criminal force. He reached Patna in the beginning of July 1975 and held secret meetings with a number of his chosen confederates and told them that he was looking for reliable q,nd committed workers who would be wilJing to

138

Histo1"!J of Moaern

Inaia

execute his plans to put an end to the despotic rule at the Centre. He reached Ahmedabad around middle of July 1975 and held secret meet­ ings. He then went to Baroda where arrangements were made for his being sheltered at the residence of Bharat C . Patel who later on be­ crtme approver. While staying with Bharat C. Patel-George Fernand­ es persuaded him and two mo:c.a.accused to be a party to the criminal conspiracy and agree to do illegal acts with the object of overawing the Central Government by show of criminal force and by doing acts of sabotage. It was planned to procure dynamite sticks and accessories like detonators and fuse wire through Bharat C. Patel. Before :the explosives were procured, Bharat C. Patel arranged a demonstration of the use of the explosives and at his instance, his nephew Atul Patel accused took George Fernandes and other accused to the stone.quarry at Halol for watching the demonstration. After seeing the destructive power of explosives, George Fernandes expressed his satisfaction that he had found what he was looking for. It was decided to use the explosives for blowing up bridges and vital rail and road links to create and spread chaos with the ultimate object of overthrowing the established Government _at the CL•ntre. While putting up at Baroda, George Fernandes also entrusted C. Patel with the job of working out his plan to set up a transmitting radio station abroad. He also assigned to him the task of secretly carrying with him abroad his letters to some foreign d:tgnitaries and organisations like Socialist International seeking their help and support. In one of those letters, George Fernandes asked the addressees to help Bharat C. Patel to set up a powerful broad­ casting unit able to cover the whole country. He also desired the BBC, World �ank and others to take positions which they take towards S outh Africa, Rhodesia and others.

Bharat

In pursuance of the agreed plan, 10 bags of dynamite sticks obtained from Timba Road Stone Quarry belonging to Bharat C. Patel and his relatives and 200 detonators and 8 rolls of fuse wire procured from M/s Vasudeva & Co. Halol were collected on 21·7· 1975 from the Mahi Guest House of Timba Road Quarry in two cars and taken to the residence of Prabhu Das Patwari accused at Ahmedabad. George Fernandes had already arranged for the storage of the explosives and the dynamite sticks were kept in a room attached to the garage . . After thus procuring the dynamite sticks, George Fernandes and his trusted lieutenants set about the task. of executing the plot to create country wide chaos through large-scale sabotage of the ritilway systeIU �nC! Government buildings. They seleQtecl ha..rd-core

Phe Emergency (1916�77)

139

confederates, held secret meetings ll.nd demonstrations to explain f& them the method of using the explosives, arrange for secretly proour�ng or transporting dynamite sticks and accessory explosives to chosen destinations in various states for carrying out e:iplosions. Finance was arranged to meet the expenses. In the commission of these· and several other illegal acts designed to further the achieve­ ment of the common object of the conspiracy, all the known and unknown members of the criminal conspiracy actively participated, As a result of their conjointed efforts, a chain of explosions in quick succession in a short sp"an of time was caused in the States of Bihar, Maharashtra and Karnataka in the furtherance of the common .object. George Fernandes toured . in disguise in various p;rts of the country to promote the object of the conspiracy. On 16·8·75, he left Ahmedabad and stayed fo� the night at Baroda with Sharad Patel. On 17·8·75, he left Baroda in Sharad Patel's car. George Fernandes reached Bangalore via ' Aurangabad and Hyderabad in the oar. At Bangalore, another lady and her husband took care of George Fernandes and she was with him when he went to Madras and Bangalore. -

'

.

_'

Investigation had revealed that George Fernandes had made Delhi an important base for his ill�gal activities where some of t�e alleged overt acts constituting offences were committed by soine of hfs co-conspirators in pursuance of the criminal conspiracy. qeorge Fernandes was operating the conspiratorial activities of. the co­ accused in Delhi while staying at the house of Captain R.P. Huilgol at Vasant Vihar, :New Delhi. Arrangements were made for the r,eceipt of the consignment of expiosives a:t Varanasi frpm Baroda. 4.t these meetings, possible targets for sabotage activity in Dellii were discussed.

\ Between November 1975 and March 1976, George Fernandes was also staying for broken periods of time at the house of Shri R. Chandra Chudan in Jor Bagh, New Delhi. His stay there was arranged by C.G.K. Reddy accused who was lookin_g after the task of ' procuring 1000 wireless sets from a foreign country. Around middle of January 1976, he had also arranged a secret meeting of George Fernandes with European Editor of the Newsweek. At that meeting, George Fernandes told his intei:viewer that he believed in the use of violence to bring down. the Prime Minister, George Fernandes reached Baroda from Bombay on 24 D1.'lceml;11�r 1975 a,nd wa,s 1\-CCQmmodated in the house of Sharad

.

HO

History� of Modei·n India

Patel. I� was during that stay that Sharad Patel overheard George Fernandes discussing the use 0f explosives for sabotage. He decided to obtain f-qll knowledge of the subversive designs of George Fernandes with a view to inform the authoritles in order to prevent the same. Mter Sharad Patel had won the confidence of George Fernandes, he offered to store the explosives at his house for. on:ward dlilspatch to chosen destinations. Sharad Patel went to Ahmedabad and brought explosives from there and stored them in his house. When all the arrangements to transport the explosives from Baroda to Varanasi through "Ntjs. Road Link of India were completed, Sharad Patennformed the authorities which ultimately led to the recovery of explosives consisting of 836 sticks of dynamite and 85 rolls of fuse wire from the premises of M/s. Road Link of India. C.G.K. Reddy and others arranged for the escape of George Fermandes to Calcutta. ·

The accused in this case took elaborate care and precautions to conceal their identity while committing the illegal acts. ·Not only messages were exchanged in code and, secluded corners were selected for holding meetings or demonstrations, assumed names were adopted or given and symbols were fixed for the purpose of mutual identification. George Fernandes used to move about in the garb of a, Sikh or a Bab� and called himseif as M.S. Dugal, Bhupinder Singh and B.P. Singh on different occasions. Some of his followers used to call him as ·"Chief." The same was done by the other accused. Explosives were given the name of "literature." The charge-sheet stated that the accused had entered into a well-planned and deep-rooted criminal conspiracy having widespread ramifications to overawe by means of criminal and/or the show of criminal force the Central Government and to commit various offences. The accused were charged for offences under Sections 121-A, Indian Penal Code, 120-B, Indian Penal Code, read with Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act,. 1908 and Sections 3 (b) and 12 of the Indian Explosives Act, 1884 as weH as substantive offences. The charge-sheet was filed in the court on 24 September 1976. It was released and published in extenso on the front page of all the newspapers in the country. The All India Radio carried it in all its bulletins. The BBC, Voice of America and other foreign sources broadcast the summary of the charges. The Government might have wanted to make the case an example to others who might think of defying the authorities. The Government also a..nno�c�q t411it th� tri&l ill tJW CQlJrt woµld proceed U�� any otlwr

The lbmergenby (i97$.7'i)

141

criininal trial and would be open to the pre$$ and the public. ]foreign correspondents were allowed to be present at the trial and cover the pro·ceedings. ' Both the approvers in the case were examined. However, as ;, result of th� elections held in March 1977, the Congress Party was defeated and the Janata Party formed the new Government. Th[ accused were released· on bail on 22 March 1977 and the cases against them were withdrawn on 26 March 1977. It is pointed out that the conspiracy was the result of . sheer desperation of some political leaders who were disgusted witJ?. -the passivity of the masses in general and the working class in parti­ cular. Some of them were Trade Union leaders who had pinned high hopes on the political role of the working class but they found that the working class did not lift a finger in defence of its own rights. They had little contact or faith in the rural masses. Some form of terrorfam appeared to be the only way to rouse the masses and . convince them that the struggle was going on. They hit upon the idea of bringing about disruption of tr�nsportation by blowing up bridges etc. The plan was neither full-fledged terrorism which could overawe the Government nor a plan of action whose message could be made to reach the people. The kind of disruption of trai:ii services envisaged could have been highly counter-productive. It was fortunate that owing to the amateurishness and lack of training of conspirators, the plan did not succeed and the dynamite failed to produce the expected explosions. ·

AU-India Acharya Sammelan (January 1976) Th� AU-India Acharya Sammelan was convened by Acharya. Vinobaji and it met at Paunar Ashram on 16, 17 and 18 January 1976. It was attended by 26 invitees, including Vice-Chancellors, professors, enlinent jurists, promfuent constructive workers and distingu�hed men of letters having no party affiliation. The Sammelan had the privilege of receiving valuable advice and guidance from Acharya Vinobaji during the course of deliberations:. The Sammelan consid�red all aspects of the situation prevailing. in India carefully and objectively, having regard to both the short. term and long-term interests of the country. Certain propositi�ns­ emerged by way of consensus. The Sammelan felt particularly concerned with tP.e· effects of the continuance of the existing situa­ tion on the younger generation. Tlie detention of a large number· ·of social and political workers who fully believed in Ahimsa and' Sarva Dharma-Bhava (equal respect for all faiths), curtailment 0£

Histor.y of Modern inJia_ civil lib.er:ties and press censorship including its coverage of parli'a �

mentary proceedings were ;not good for the health of the ' nation, if

continued indefinitely. In view of the common and widespread desire for far-reaching electoral reforms, the Sammelan ho.Ped that specific proposals for such reforms would be framed through mutual

consultation between all concerned in order that elections at all levels became fair, free from corruption and inexpensive. The Sammelan was convinced that violence and - democratic socialism

could not go together.

In essence, only ethical means should be

employeQ. for achieving noble ends in . all sphere.a of national life. From tin;i.e to time, proposals for constitutional reforms had been

put forward.

In this connection, an important objective should

be to evolve effective means for decentralised power and responsi­

w� to the grass-roots.

bility do

that evep.,%fter

It was a matter of great concer�

28 years of freedom, millions of Indians livei;I belo;w

the poverty line.

The Sammelan would deem it

a privilege to be

of .any service in further,ing the process of national r�conciliation and constructive cooperation.

The Sammelan requested Acharya

Vinobaji t� take such steps as he may consider proper for furthering

�he suggestions made in the statepient. However, nothing came out of this Sammelan,

Negotiations for Settlemen"t JJ1 the winter of

1976, a few leaders of _ the Opposition were Eij;her by accident or design, those leaders were in favour of having negotiations for a settlement with Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Shri Biju Patnaik publicly expressed his admiration for

released.

the gains ;of emergency. Mr. Karunanidhi, the former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, had "worries about the enquiry instituted against him. He played an important part to bring the various parties to the :µegotiating table. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was in a ver:y strong position and did not see any reason for a 'compromise. She also did not want to create the impression that she was eager for negotiations. However, she had no objection if a settlement was made on her own terms. She wanted surrender and not a compromise in which she had to make concessions. The result was that those who were negotiating were willing to - siirrander unconditionally only if the �urrender was an honourable one. Rowev�r, th�re W{LS one big hurdle in the way.

The:re . . :w.ere

many le�der_s w49 were still in prison and they. formed. the .,majority. They had..to be consqlted before-_ any settlemept QOuld be arrived . ·at . The,approval of J11yaprakash Narayan was. also ne.cessary for . . a settlement. '

Plie Emergency 'c1975-77-) O.q. 14 December 1976, George Fernandes wrote from prison a letter to Shri N. C. Goray who had not been arrested and represented the Socialist Pa.rty in the negotiating team. In that letter he reminded him of the convention of Socialist workers in. Bombay sometime back and asked him to prevent the settlement which h� called a "sell-out." On the same date, he wrote a letter to "Jay$1.pra.kash Narayan informing him of what was going on and. his own opposition to the same. To quote from that letter : "ln the context of the negotiations that are under way and the general anxiety for a settlement that is apparent from the attitude of the leadership of most opposition parties, it iS necessary to mak,� it clear that the Socialist Party cannot agree to participate in such negotiations, nor will it agree to join other parties in the move to withdraw the struggle against the dictatorship. The Socialist Party has made its position clear in the past and has endorsed it at the recent Bombay convention. A.s the Chairman of the Socialist Party, I will not be a party to the repudiation of what has been an article of faith and Jhich has received unqualified and unanimous support and endorsement from the rank and file. I think it my duty to make the position of the Socialist Party and of my own clear to you as I understand that you are being pressurised to agree to the withdrawal of the s�ruggle by the Lok Sangharsh Samiti." A.fter that nothing 'was heard of the negotiations for a settlement. However, it is pointed out that in one way those negotiations contributed to the revival of democracy in India. On account of the weakness of the Opposition parties as shown during the•negotiations, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was encouraged to seek legitimacy for her Government. Her calculation that she would come out victorious from the elections may have been primarily based on the desire of the Opposition to come to a settlement with her on her own terms.

Achievements of Emergency

Prime Minister Indira Gandhi summed up the achievements �f Emergency in these words: "The only vindication is the results achieved during the emergency. Before the emergency, everything was on the downgrade. When I left, India was at its peak in military strength, economic stability and soundness; and all world economic institutions agreed for the first time that we could have rapid economic growth and that a developing country can solve prol;>le¥ts of food and so fortht We built �ur foreign exchange reserves and we were beginning to make a go of the public sector. Productipn had gone 1;1P and corruption had come down and everything was. going

Hirtor.y oj Mociern India mu�h more smoothly. Offices were working smoothly. During the first year of tiie E�ergency, every one (except the smugglers) asked why we had not had it earlier. My assessment is that if we had not done something there would have been widespread vioienc There would have been utter political and economic chaos and nobody to fill the vacuum . I decided to remain because I did not see who would handle it at the moment!'

�

• •

·

Dom Moraes writes that «three beneficial results came from the imposition of emergency. The first w:as that the Indian population as a whole became Yery awai;e thq,t it inhabited a governed country, a fact it had recently needed to know. The second was that it became aware tbat the government of the country was by and large for the people, Tor under MISA a large number of smugglers and. tax defalcators were imprisoned, and a rigorous control of commodity prices enfoi:ced, so that the cost of living went down. Third, property and life became much safer, for the penalties for crime increased and murder, armed robbery, theft aud rape, which had become very common in the country while the police were dealing with political agitation against a background of high prices, low wages, and un­ employment, decreased in incidence" p.223).

(MrB. Gandhi,

During the emergency period, India .made a mafor break­ through on 1 August 1975 in the field of mass communication when she started using one of the most sophisticated and versatile satellites to carry television programmes to 2400 remote villages in 20 districts .spread over six states. The total area covered under the Satellite: ,Instructional Television Experiment (SITE) is over three lakhs of square kilometres and the population covered is 4·5 crores. People generally agreed that there were rigours and hardahips during the emergency, but they also pointed out to certain gains during the Emergency. Some of those gains were minor and the other major ones. To the first category belonged the movement of trains on time and queueing up for buses in the capital and the cleanliness 'vhlch was becoming very much evident in the cities. The major gains were the highly improved industrial relations, price ·stability, µnpressive spurt in the export of such non-traditional items as steel and engineering goods and record output and procurement of foodgrains:

As regards the timely running of trains, some order was certainly brought about on the trunk services and the long-distan,ce trains . as they touched large cities and could easily impress foreig­ ners and publicity men who counted. However, the s ort distance

�

trains �nd the railway services in the backyards remained muc;ii the

Pke Emergon

Chapter VI deals with offences and procedure for trial. Section 16 provides that whoever compels any person to render any bonded labour shall be punishablewith imprisonment for a term which may ex• tend to three years and also with fine which may extend to Rs. 2000/-. Section 17 provides that whoever advances any bonded debt shall be t punishabl� wi h im:prisonmen'(; which may extend to 3 years �nd

History of Moaern Inilia

150

also to fine upto Rs: 2000/-. Section 18 provides for punishment for extracting bonded labour under the bonded labour system. SE!ction 19 deals with punishment for omission or failure to restore possession of property to bonded labourers. Section 20 provides for punish� -ment for an offenc,e of abetment. .

This Act is a great landmark as it abolishes a very cruel and degrading sy�tem in the country. However, it is pointed out that . without alternative sources of rural credit and the demolition of the edifice of usury which has been built up in the country, bondage remains the only form of repayment available to the debtor. His choice fo between bare survival with forced labour or starvation in freedom. On 18 April 1976, the Home Ministry announced that "surveys were conducted tb identify the different forms of debt bondage which still existed in the guise of ostensibly legal systems." The problem is a very big one and it requires the combined efforts of the Government machinery and the social workers in the country to end the curse of bonded labour. Law alone cannot solve this problem because the rich who employ the bonded labour are in a position to dictate their terms to the starving labourers who are struggling for their existence.

Lessons of Emergency Shri Mankekar and Kamla Mankekar point out that the emer­ gency taught the people of India some unforgettable lessons. Those amongst us who genuinely believed that perhaps benevolent dictator­ ship is the answer to our country!s probJems which are at once gigantic; compiex and urgent, realise that dictatorship is an unmixed evil. An absolute power corrupts absolutely. No one can be trusted v;ith absolute power, not even a saint. An open society and a free press are the only effective guarantees against the abuse of power. A very serious effort should be made to strengthen the foundations and structure of the freedom of the press so that no one, however mighty,.will dare in future to tamper with the freedom of the press. The people discovered during the emergency what mass-scale fear psychosis.can do to otherwise sane and sensitive persons. Men become worms and crawl due to horror. The people of India also realised that given a chance, our officialdom, from the highest to the lowest, can become callous and brutish. There was a complete lack of scruples among the Congress leaders. The surprise was that. the rank and file of the Congress Party tamely tolerated them. (Decline and Fall of Indira Gandhi, pp. 207-8) .

CHAPTER V

AMENDMENTS OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION DURING EMERGENCY There were five .Amendments of the Indian Constitution during the period of emergency. The Oonstitution (Thirty-eighth Amendment) Act, 1975 received the assent of the President on 1 .August 1975. This .Amendment put beyond judicial scrutiny the "satisfactionu of the Presiqent' in declaring the emergency as also the Ordinance. making powers of the President, ·Governors and Administrators of the Union Territories. This .Amendment made changes in Articles 123, 213, 239-B, 352, 356, 359 and 360 of the Constitution. In Article 123 of the Constitution dealing with the power of President . to promulgate Ordinances during recess of '.Parliament, after clause (3), the following clause (4) was inserted and was to be deemed to have been always inserted : "Notwithstanding anytl!ing in the Constitution, the satisfaction of the ;president mentioned in clause (!.) " shall be fine.� and conclusive and shjl:�l not be questioned in a_ny court on any ground." That means �hat if the President was satisfied that circumstances e:xisted whiCh made it necessary for him to take immelliate action,· he could promulgate an Ordinance if both Houses of Parliament were not in session and the action taken by him shall . be final and conclusive and could not be questioned in any court on ' any ground. Article 213 deals with the power of Governor to p�omulgate during the recess of legislature. The addition made.by ances Ordin th .Amendment provided that if the Governor was Thirty-eigh the existed which made it necessary for circumstances that satisfied he could promulgate an Ordinance action, him to take immediate while doing so shall be final Governor the of and the satisfaction and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court on any ground.

Article 239-B of the Constitution deals with the power of an Administra.tor of a Union Territory to promulgate Ordinances during

! 51

History of MoBern India

152

the recess of legislature. The addition made by the Amendment Act provided that the satisfaction of the Administrator for promulgating an Ordinance shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court on any ground. Article

352 deals with the power of the

emergency in the country. Amendment

Act

provided

President by Article proclamations

on

The new

352

that the

(4) inserted by the

power

conferred

on the

shall include the power to issue different

different

aggression or internal

President to proclaim

clause

grounds,

being

war

or external

disturbance or imminent dangel'

or external aggression or

of

war

internal disturbance, whether or not

there is a Proclamation already issued. by the President under Article

352 (1) and such Proclamation

is

in operation.

Clause

(5)

provided that notwithstanding anything in the Constitution, the

satisfaction of the Preside�t under Article

352 while

proclaiming

emergency shall be final and conclusive and shall not be question..­ ed in any court on any ground.

Neither the Supreme Court nor

any other court shall have jurisdiction to enteitain any question,

on any ground, relating to the validity of a declaration ma.de by Proclamation by the President to the effect stated in Article or the continued operation of such Proclamation. Article

356

352(1)

provisions regarding the situation in case of failure of constitutional machinery in states. Clause (5) was added to the .Article and it contains

which may arise a

state or

provided that notwithstanding anything in the Co�stitution, the satisfaction of the President regarding th.e situation in a State in which the constitutional machinery had failed and the action ta.ken by him shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court on any ground.

Article 359 deals with the suspension of the enforcement of the fundamental rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution during emergency. The new Clause (I.A) provided that while an

order made under Article 359 ( l} mentioning any of the rights conferred by Part III is in operation, nothing in that Part conferring those rights shall restrict the power of the State to make

any law or to take any executive action which the State would but for the provisions contained in that Part be competent to make or to take, but any law so made sha.11, to the extent of the incompetency, �ease to have effect as soon as the order aforesaid ceases to operate, except as respects things done or omitteq '{;Q l;ie done b efore the l{l.W so Qe?,�es to h?ive e:ffeot.

.Amendments of the Indian Oonstitution during Emergency .Article 360 of

153

the Constitution deals with the provisions

regarding financial emergency. Clause (1) deals with the satisfaction of the President whether :financial emergency is to be declared or not.

�

The n'ew Clausf' (5) provided t at notwithstan

�

anything

in the Constitution, the satisfaction of, the President shall be final and conclusive and shall not be questioned in any court on any ground. Neither the Supreme Court nor any other court sha,ll have jurisdiction to entertain any question on any ground regarding the validity of a declaration made by Proclamation by the President

to that effect or the continued operation of f!UCh Proclamation. The net result of this Amendment was that the power of the executive in certain cases became absolute and the same could not be challenged before

the Supreme Court or any other Court on

any ground whatsoever.

The courts could not go into the question

whether an Ordinance made was valid or not or the

Proclamation

made by the President was invalid for any reason.

The Constitution (Thirty-n�nth Amendment) Act, 1975 1975.

/

This Act received the assent of the President on 10 August It made changes in Articles 71 and 329 of the Constitution.

It inserted a new Article 329-A and also inserted a large number of Acts numbering 38 in the Ninth Schedule of th